mn j ~ 1899 

FACTS and SUGGESTIONS for Level-Headed 
Voters Who Prize Patriotism More than 
Party ism. Are You One?. 


JF 493 



IN HELL 


AND THE 

WAY OUT 


“Our POOR are living in a perpetual HELL in which the 
conditions are becoming more unbearable.”—Florence E. Kelley 


. . .Price io Cents . . . 




































,♦ f 
























In Hell AND 

the Way Out, 

A Non-Partisan, political 
Hand-book. 


A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PRESENT CONDITIONS, 
AND A PLAN OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY OUTLINED. 


RESPECTFULLY inscribed to the farmers and trade 
UNIONISTS OF AMERICA. 


*»> 




BY ONE OF THEIR NUMBER. 



* * * * 




CHICAGO : 

CHARLES H. KERR & COMPANY. 


Copyright 1896 by Henry E. Allen. 





PUBLISHER’S NOTE. 


The first edition of this little work was published by the 
author, and five thousand copies were circulated through 
his personal efforts. He has now given the plates and 
copyright to the cooperative company of which I am man¬ 
ager, as a contribution to the cause of social progress. In 
consequence of this, we shall furnish copies by the hundred 
at a very low rate to those wishing them to give away, and 
we shall devote all the profits above the most necessary 
expenses to the circulation of other literature of reform. 

Direct Legislation seems a certainty of the near future. 
We may, therefore, work with good courage to hasten its 
coming ; but it is none too soon to face the next question : 
What shall we do with it when we get it? There is no 
lack of books full of suggestions on this point, but for 
several years I have been looking for one which should 
point out a definite, practical plan of political action which 
should secure to the worker the full product of his labor 
without either increasing the burdens of taxation or using 
the force of the government to confiscate the wealth 
acquired under existing laws. 

I believe I have found it at last, and it is my hope that 
every reader of “In Hell and the Way Out ” will send for 
a copy ofW'U'Ucle Sam in Business and learn from it what 
the voters; of jtfiiG , coyanfiry wdl be able 1o do for their own 
emancipation when once direct legislation is a fact. 

T 7 CHARLES H. KERR. 



Unity Library, No. 77. December, 1897. Monthly, $3.00 per Year. 

(Entered at the Post Office, Chicago, as Second-Class Matter.) 



INTRODUCTORY TO SECOND EDITION. 


More than two years ago, when this handbook was pub¬ 
lished, the question of Direct Legislation was compara¬ 
tively new. Not so to-day. It has passed the gamut of 
falsehood and abuse, and I believe it practically stands 
approved by a majority of the American people if an honest 
expression of all parties could be taken. 

The person who opposes Direct Legislation and still 
claims to believe in free government occupies a ludicrous 
position,—a similar position to the pretender who boasted 
that he believed in Christianity but was opposed to the 
goiden rule. 

To attempt to prove that representative government is 
not a failure to-day would be tantamount to proving that 
the sun does not shine at 12 o’clock, noon. In fact men 
are scarce who can attempt such a demonstration and keep 
their faces straight. 

Scratch the man who opposes Direct Legislation and 
you are likely to find either ignorance or supposed self- 
interest, or both. 

To say that we oppose direct vote is virtually saying that 
we do not favor popular rule. The person who opposes 
popular rule—majority rule—the rule of the people—is 
certainly out of place in a republic. He should betake 
himself to a monarchy. 

Pure democracy has but one meaning—the rule of the 
people. It is the ideal in government, and every political 
reform through all the ages has tended toward this ideal. 

The two vital issues to-day in every civilized nation on 
earth are Direct Legislation and Public Ownership. 

Monopoly is crowding these issues to the front in a man- 


4 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


ner unprecedented in the history of the race. There are 
either better or perilous times just ahead of us. Reader, 
whatever ticket we may vote in the campaign of 1900 let 
us stand together on this vital proposition: 

“No people can be Self-Governing who are denied the 
privilege to vote Yes or No upon every important law that 
is to Govern them.” Though it be true that “gold bars 
the way to all reforms,” I believe the intelligent majority 
are to-day facing the sunrise, and that the new time,—the 
better day,—is just ahead. 

Yours for better conditions, 

Henry E. Allen. 

Berwick, Ill., Feb., 1899. 





IN HELL. 

IS THERE A WAY OUT OF PRESENT CONDITIONS? 

It will hardly be denied that the liberalizing trend of 
thought in recent years has done much to uproot the old be¬ 
lief in a “ literal hell” and a ‘-personal devil.” 

Whatever purpose these beliefs may have conserved in the 
childhood of the race they seem now to be well towards the 
head in the procession of the century’s vanishing myths. 

After all are we not indebted to these mythical conceptions 
for the one word coinage which symbolizes better than any 
other word in human language the acme of bad conditions? 
Is there any other word which so fully signifies and typifies 
blank and black despair ? Whatever may be our religious 
convictions—or whether we have any—this oft-repeated word 
somehow seems to set forth the suffering, wretchedness and 
misery that may come to a human being better than any other 
word, and we are apt to repeat it with a shudder. Why ? Is 
it because so many of us have come to know from experience 
its ancient, deeper meaning? Is it for the reason that it is no 
longer necessary for us to be “sent to hell” or to go to hell, 
but because it is so easy under present conditions for hell to 
come to us? 

It is certainly beyond dispute that the most of us—to use 
the parlance of the day and the rather expressive words of 
Kate Field—are having “a hell of a time,” are fast coming to 
the conclusion that this is “a hell of a condition,” and that we 
are all more or less in it. 

What little I have seen of hell (have lived in Chicago but 
a few years and have never been a resident of New York) con¬ 
vinces me that it is merely a condition—not a locality,—and 
that all who are “ in hell,” and are having “a hell of a time,” 
are not in it from choice, are not in love with it, and would 
like mighty well to get out, (republicans and democrats ex¬ 
cepted.) 

Of late it seems that hell and politics have in someway got 
mixed, and the mixture is not a success. From all accounts 


6 


In Hell and the Way Out . 


hell must be bad enough without having any politics in it. 

Perhaps I already owe the reader an apology for using the 
term hell;—it is a word that grates harshly on nearly all ears. 
But in a study of politics as well as theology, is not the use of 
the term a necessity ? Hasn’t hell been dropping out of the¬ 
ology and into politics? It may have been an element of 
merit in theology but it certainly has not improved politics. 

But is not hell losing its terrors? Is not the belief becom¬ 
ing current that after all the problematical hell may be even 
better than our political and industrial hades into which so 
many have found their way ? There may be very trying con¬ 
ditions in the other hell, but if it is any worse than we have 
found it under Cleveland the manager ought to be ashamed of 
himself. If he persists in being that kind of a manager we 
will be forced to conclude that he belongs to the “ Manager’s 
Association/’ But why should such an old, experienced mana¬ 
ger allow Cleveland and congress to out-manage him in a gold- 
standard country like this ?—Are we to understand these are 
rival establishments or a trust ? 

But why is it that the United States and hell are synony¬ 
mous terms to millions of our people ? Let me tell you. It 
is because three destructive agencies are sapping the founda¬ 
tions of popular government. Three dangers now confront 
us never provided against by the framers of our constitution; 
these are :— 

1 Selfishness, engendered by present conditions. 

2 The money power. 

3 Inefficiency of our representative system. 

Is it necessary to prove that present conditions are breeding 
a race of human blood-suckers? Are not the evidences on 
every hand ? Only recently thousands of sweat-shop workers 
were on the verge of starvation both in Chicago and New York, 
and to my knowledge not one of the scores of millionaires 
within elbow reach offered a penny or protest to relieve the 
suffering. Think of holding thousands of dependent women 
and children in hunger and wretchedness simply to retain a 
business advantage ! Has any other age, civilized or barba¬ 
rous, permitted human misery to be made a matter of whole¬ 
sale barter as at present ? For profit we are turning our fac¬ 
tories into charnel houses; for profit we rate child and animal 
labor the same, and mules and men of equal value. 


Present Conditions and the Way Out. 


7 


Ignatius Donnelly says in Golden Battle: “ There is more 

devil in man than in all the wild animals put together; more 
of a cunning, complex, insatiable, unfathomable devil,—wolf, 
tiger, fox, gorilla, lion, jackal,—all stirred together in one hor¬ 
rible compound.” Almost every newspaper teems with proofs. 

Selfishness is the root sin of the age. 

Present conditions which are rapidly leading us on to an- 
archial plutocracy foster its growth. Generous impulses are 
stifled. Those who are true and noble are so in defiance of 
their environment. 

When a poor man is treated as a criminal by society simply 
because he is poor is it surprising that greed and avarice are 
the master incentives of the day ? 

I charge that excessive wealth is wholly responsible for the 
hell into which our nation has been plunged. The low mark 
it has set for civilization disgraces the intelligence of our time. 
Its unwise and selfish use of property and power demonstrates 
the urgent necessity of curtailment—the necessity of a suc¬ 
cession property tax. 

It is susceptible of proof that less than one thousand wealth 
owners are responsible for the wide-spread unrest and discon¬ 
tent of our nation to-day, for the present harrowing and dan¬ 
gerous conditions of American life,—the hell of the year 1896 . 

Emerson well said : “ It is high time our bad wealth came 
to an end.” 

Let us not be unmindful of these facts : Extreme wealth in 
every nation produces extreme poverty. When the wealth of 
a country aggregates in the hands of a few the masses must 
be poor. Excessive wealth is invariably ill-gotten. The last 
census reports furnish proof that we are rapidly becoming a 
nation of millionaires and paupers. I say a system is already 
damned that will conduce to such conditions. 

In recent years individual selfishness has acquired an inten¬ 
sified form, and under the operation of organized selfishness 
almost every phase of tyranny and oppression is possible. Or¬ 
ganized selfishness is deadening the public conscience to the 
appeals of humanity, and fostering the principles of despotism. 

But if there is one thing in all the world barren of honor, 
soul, feeling or conscience it is the second of our triumvirate, 
the money power, the result of selfishness. 


8 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


No crime is too henious to serve its purpose. It makes long 
prayers and short wages; prefers property rights to human 
rights and has “ nothing to arbitrate.” With an insatiable ap¬ 
petite it gnaws at the marrow-bone of privilege. It is crowd¬ 
ing our prisons, brothels and insane asylums, and has rung in 
an alarming era of divorce, drunkenness and suicide. It is 
fast reducing American agriculture to a system of English 
tenantry. It gloats over the delicate flesh of women and 
children, and its vampire of debt stalks across the threshold 
of more than two-thirds of our American homes. It corners 
gold then insists that the business of the world shall be trans¬ 
acted on the narrow volume of this one metal. The money 
power of to-day is all this and more ! 

Since this octopus has acquired such proportions the 

INEFFICIENCY OF OUR REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM 

must be apparent to all who have given the matter unprej¬ 
udiced thought. The history of legislation for the past twenty 
years furnishes conclusive proof that this system has worked 
to perfection in aiding the money power to enrich itself at 
the expense of the people. In proof of this statement I cite 
the following facts: 

John Clark Ridpath, the historian, has proven that our pres¬ 
ent national debt represents more wealth than did our en¬ 
tire national debt of 3000 million dollars at the close of the 
war, thirty yeary ago. These are Mr. Ridpath’s words : 

“For thirty years the American people have been paying into that horrible mael¬ 
strom the volume of their great resources, They have paid on their debt, or at least they 
have paid, iu this long period such a prodigious sum that arithmetic can hardly express 
it. The imagination cannot embrace it and yet it is the truth of the living God that in 
the year 1896 the national debt of the United States will ^purchase aslits equivalent in 
value as much of the average of twenty-five of the leading commodities of the American 
market, including real estate and labor, as the same debt would purchase at its max¬ 
imum on the first of March, 1866. The people have paid and paid for I thirty years, and 
at the end have paid just this -~ NOTHING ! 

The money power has brought about this condition by 
striking down nearly one-half of our coin circulation in de¬ 
monetizing silver. Consequently shrinkage of values has kept 
pace with our shrinking money volume. Hence the above 
startling and important fact. * 

Abraham Lincoln said : “ If a government contracts a debt 
with a certain amount of money in circulation and then con- 


* Momentous and alarming as this fact is, that we have paid about 1600 million 
dollars on our national debt without actually reducing it a dollar, our so-called pluto- 



Some Startling Facts. 


9 


tracts the money volume before the debt is paid, it is the most 
heniouscrime a government can commit against the people.” 

What shall we say of a representative system which has 
for so many years utterly failed to check legislation favorable 
to class interests and gold monopoly ? 

During the years this contraction process was carried on 
the money power received through its pliant tools in congress 
200 million acres of land and ioo million dollars in guaranteed 
interest-bearing railroad bonds,—a sum sufficient to build and 
equip every needed railroad in the United States. Still the 
government does not control one foot of railroad and never 
will so long as the money power controls the government. 
Another little item of more than 300 million dollars (not in¬ 
cluding the recent appropriation of 275 million dollars) has 
been expended for river and harbor improvement. The reader 
must be the judge as to what amount of this vast sum was 
honestly expended for the public good. But this is not all. 
Congress has allowed the English arristocracy to secure nearly 
74 million acres of our best farming lands which should have 
been held in reserve for American workingmen. 

When we consider what substantial benefit the people have 
derived from the bestowal of all this wealth, to say nothing of 
the hundreds of millions expended on our water-logged navy, 
concessions made to the banking interests, .and various con¬ 
tributions made to the money power through tariff schedules, 
etc., then we can begin to form a correct opinion of what con¬ 
gress has been doing all these years for working people. 

Is it any matter for surprise that congress has made more 
millionaires since the war than all the world besides has made 
during the past two hundred years ? It is safe to say no other 
people have been so egregiously plundered by their so-called 


cratic press -- the city dalies of the nation-- have almost uniformly ignored the matter 
Could proof be more convincing of their subserviency to the money power ? On the 
other hand, these newspapers, especially in the eastern and middle states, have resorted 
to downright misrepresentation and lying on the money question to mislead the reader. 
If a newspaper will suppress or pervert facts on the money question' is it not likely to 
do so on other questions ? The metropolitan press is supported mainly by wage-worK- 
ers, and if ever a boycott was justifiable it certainly would be so in the case of these ex¬ 
ponents of the money power. Workingmen everywhere should not only refuse to 
read prostituted papers, but they should also refuse to patronize those who advertise ip 
their columns. The time has come when we should make a sharp distinction between 
iriends and enemies. The money power has ruled too long. 


IO 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


representatives. No other people ever felt more keenly the 
iron hand of corporate and monopoly greed than we do to-day. 
Had we not lived in the most productive country on earth such 
wholesale robbery would long ago have exhausted the people’s 
resources. Nearly all government lands desirable for settle¬ 
ment have been disposed of, and still we are actually (not nom¬ 
inally) in debt as much as we were at the close of the war, 
thirty years ago. Our public servants have given millions 
away in franchises, and we are still without any means of rais¬ 
ing public revenues except taxation. How would any private 
business be likely to succeed under similar management ? 

But this is not the worst. Our contributions to corporations 
have helped create and foster the blood-sucking aggregation 
which is to-day preying upon the lives of the people Had 
we simply been plundered the case would not be so bad. but 
we have been unmercifully sand-bagged as well. 

To sum it up in one sentence: the nation has received as an 
equivalent for its property more than six hundred trusts and 
combines which to-day control almost every important indus¬ 
try. The blight of monopoly is everywhere visible. Better, 
a thousand times better for the masses if the property con¬ 
tributed to many of our corporations and monopolies could 
have been sunk in the sea ! 

Our eleventh census report clearly shows that these con¬ 
ditions have been growing steadily worse for more than twenty 
years, and yet not one distinctive anti-monopoly law has been 
enacted during all this time. From the reading of the last re¬ 
publican platform one might conclude that there is not a mo¬ 
nopoly or combine in the country, as neither word appears in 
the document. Not one law of importance has been passed in 
all these years directly in the interest of working-people—but 
volumes of laws have been passed in the interest of the money 
power. 

I wonder we have escaped revolution so long ! 

The same influences responsible for twenty years or more 
of class legislation are again seeking preferment. They ask 
another lease of life to rob your children’s children. Shall 
we help to rivet the chains of debt on those unable to defend 
themselves? We are asked to perpetuate this hell in the in¬ 
terest of the money power,—no one else is satisfied with it. 
Is it the part of patriotism and good citizenship to vote to con¬ 
tinue a delegate system that has prostituted its services in the 




A Dishonorable Record. 


U 


interest of predatory wealth until the very earth seems to 
groan with the injustice—until the unrest of the masses cer¬ 
tainly presages revolution? Could evidence be more convinc¬ 
ing that the fault lies with our political, delegate system ? 
Nature has been lavish with her bounties, but it is well known 
that the sowers are not the gleaners. 

If our political system is at fault why not substitute a sys¬ 
tem that may possibly be better but cannot be worse? If the 
great body of the people are yet honest and sincerely desire 
just and efficient laws,—laws that will rest upon all alike— 
why not vote to give the poor, over-worked politician a long 
vacation and let the people try their powers at law-making ? 
But the reader may contend that only free silver and the tariff 
are the issues. Can we depend on the politicians to settle even 
these issues ? What has been their success in the past ? With 
a gold-standard senate or house what must be the fate of free 
silver, although the people vote it three to one ? We will need 
a direct system of voting to settle these issues, not to mention 
the many others even more important. 

Now is the time to begin the agitation. In the following 
pages I endeavor to show why a system of self-government— 
the “direct rule of the people,” should be adopted at the earli¬ 
est possible moment, adopted before it is too late. 

If every voter who favors such a system would support only 
candidates pledged to Direct Legislation, the way out of 
present conditions would be short and simple. 

The money power will be solidly opposed to such a change, 
and every day the present system is continued will make the 
change more difficult and hazardous. 

Friend, think seriously. This issue may involve more of 
peace and happiness or more of misery and bondage than 
you apprehend. You are to decide whether we shall con¬ 
tinue the rule of the money power through the politicians, or 
adopt “ the rule of the people.” 

In the quiet of your home, in the presence of those you 
love best,decide this issue. In after years may their gratitude 
be the evidence that your decision was unselfish, just and 
patriotic. 


12 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


“ Truth does not depend upon majorities, and only asks an 
impartial, respectful hearing.” I am aware that with many 
whose station in life is attended with innumerable comforts con¬ 
servatism has in fact become a second nature. With them 
earnest appeal is fanaticism and vehement protest, anarchy. 
But will the multitudes of our people, now hovering close to 
the edge of hopeless poverty and misery, be wise in accepting 
counsel from this source ? My contention is with the present 
system, with present conditions. I have not intentionally at¬ 
tacked individuals. For this reason I add the following : 

A WORD OF EXPLANATION. 

Allusions to the money power in these pages have no ref¬ 
erence to wealth honestly earned or fairly acquired, but to re¬ 
dundant riches amassed through privilege, deception and 
greed, whether held by an individual or by predatory corpo¬ 
rations. 

I am not informed of the amount of property acquired by 
Thomas A. Edison. But be it much or little, every cent he 
owns has been well and faithfully earned through tireless 
years of devotion to science for the good of the race. That 
he should turn to be an avowed socialist is only consistent 
with such a life of self-sacrifice. 

If all men of wealth belonged to the same rank these per¬ 
ilous times would not be. There would not exist the necessity 
perhaps of throwing about liberty and free government every 
possible safe-guard. But fortunately for the people Wall and 
Lombard streets, the bond syndicates and bankers, the mort- 
gagesharks and money-changers have been too defiant. Their 
arrogance has in some degree aroused the people, and they 
have begun to ask why, in a young republic like this, the worst 
conditions in all Europe should now find a parallel. They 
want to know why there were more evictions in New York 
city last year than in all of Ireland; why sectionalism has 
again made its way into politics, dividing the East and the 
West; why eastern bankers and capitalists are so anxious 
to inform western workingmen how to vote. 

The people are thinking. Hunger is sometimes a stimulus 
to thought. What may come of it all ? Thousands are al¬ 
ready tired and disgusted with party-rule and political cor¬ 
ruption. The times are ripe, mellow ripe for a change.* Let 
us hope it is the dawn of a brighter day for all who toil. 


THE SWISS METHOD OF 


DIRECT LEGISLATION. 


HOW THE PEOPLE CAN MAKE THEIR OWN LAWS. 

For several years the eyes of nearly all students of political 
science, the world over, have been turned toward Switzerland, 
the ideal republic of the old world. 

The liberty-loving Swiss have been making an actual test of 
perhaps the most important problem in the experiment of free 
government, namely: the most efficient method for the ex¬ 
pression of the popular will. Or, in other words, they have 
been making a thorough trial of what seems at this time to be 
the most practical system by which “the rule of the people” 
can be secured and maintained. 

Their discoveries comprise what is now known as Direct 
Legislation through the Initiative and Referendum. 

WHAT IS THE INITIATIVE? 

The Initiative may be defined as an institution by which a 
certain percentage of the voters can initiate or propose laws, 
say from 5 to 20 per cent. 

The Initiative gives the people the power to originate 
laws. It gives the people the power to compel the legislature 
to put in form all such laws as they may initiate or demand by 
a preliminary vote. 

The following from a work by W. D. McCracken, A. M., is 
a plain and concise statement of the Initiative : 

“Take any question in the United States in which a body of 
voters is interested, but which has not yet entered into prac¬ 
tical politics, as we say. Under present circumstances how 
can such a question be brought into the channel of legislation ? 
The most obvious method is by electing a representative 
who is pledged to lay a bill before the House incorporating 
the desired reform. But this is no easy matter, even with the 
backing of many votes, for our electoral system is so con¬ 
trived that great numbers of voters are practically disfran¬ 
chised at every election. In fact until some form of propor- 





i4 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


tional representation is adopted, which shall make every vote 
count for something, and destroy every attempt at gerryman¬ 
dering, the various groups of earnest reformers can hardly 
hope to be represented. 

But suppose, for an instant, that a representative could be 
elected on such an issue, there is no certainty that his bill 
would be even noticed, much less discussed, or that if it were 
discussed, it would not be promptly tabled, as is so often the 
case. Two other courses lie open in this country—petition 
and bribery. Of the second I need only say that, though it 
may seem a perfectly natural method to the agents of great 
corporations, it is not likely to commend itself to those who 
are striving for clean government. The expedient of a petition 
is frequently resorted to. But the signatures of the sovereign 
people are rarely treated seriously by politicians. If they 
could be accompanied by a direct command the case would be 
far different. In Switzerland, however, the introduction into 
practical politics of any question which has attracted public 
attention is acomp lished in a simple, effectual and direct 
manner. The Swiss people now enjoy the right of proposing 
measures themselves, which is called the Initiative, and this 
method has been wonderfully successful. 

Seventeen out of twenty-two cantons have adopted this form 
of true democracy. In 1891 it was introduced into the pro¬ 
visions for amending the Swiss Federal Constitution. This act 
marks the greatest advance in the direction of popular sover¬ 
eignty which has yet been made by any modern nation. The 
right of the Initiative it must be remembered, is not merely 
the privilege of petition. It is a constitutional demand by a 
certain percentage of the population/—not an irregular re¬ 
quest, and must be heeded.” 

WHAT IS THE REFERENDUM ? 

The Referendum is an institution by which all proposed laws 
are referred to the people for final acceptance or rejection. 

It is the people’s “ thou shalt” and “thou shalt not.” 

It affords every citizen the opportunity at the ballot box to 
register a “ yes ” or “ no ” on every important law by which 
he is to be governed. 

The Referendum has been adopted by every canton of the 
Swiss Confederation except one. I again quote from “ Swiss 
Solutions of American Problems 



What Is Direct Legislation l 


15 


“The Referendum is above all things fatal to anything like 
extravagance in the management of public funds ; it descerns 
instantly and kills remorselessly all manner of jobs, and for¬ 
bids favors lavished upon one district at the expense of the 
rest. Nowhere in the world does government display more 

( ability and stability, more simplicity and economy, than in the 
republic of Switzerland. The educational effect has also been 
marked. Every voter has found himself obliged to inves¬ 
tigate and pass judgment upon bills on their merits, not 
merely to vote blindly for vague party policies.” 

It will be seen that the Initiative and Referendum provide 
a very simple method for “the rule of the people,” without 
the interference of “ middlemen.” It gives the people a chance 
to start and stop all laws—a privilege no other form of govern¬ 
ment has ever allowed. Free government is safe only when 
the people rule absolutely. Under this method no legislation 
not in the interest of a majority can become a law. 

Under this system the people can propose or initiate laws— 
the only condition being that a certain percentage of voters 
must petition for the proposed measure or law. Then when 
the requisite number have petitioned the proposed law must 
be submitted to the whole body of voters for their rejection 
or adoption. 

WHAT IS DIRECT LEGISLATION ? 

By this method the people vote direct on the laws by which 
they are to be governed, hence it is called Direct Legislation. 

This system is not only applicable in township and county 
affairs, but equally so in municipal, state and national affairs, 
as the Swiss people have so fully demonstrated during the 
past twenty years or more. 

Local option is but a species of the Referendum. Our pres¬ 
ent plan of referring state constitutions, and amendments to 
our Federal constitution, direct to the people for their adop¬ 
tion is practically the Swiss method of direct vote. All that 
is necessary is to extend this same, century-tried principle to 
all departments of law-making, and we have made the im¬ 
portant change. 

On the nth of February last the legislature of Iowa voted 
favorably on a bill giving the power to school districts to vote 
for free text books. This is Direct Legislation through the 
Referendum on a very small scale. Why should not the peo- 







i6 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


pie have this privilege on all important measures ? Not only 
the right to vote “yes ” or “ no ” on every important measure, 
but the power as well to propose or initiate new measures? 
Then we would have absolute self-rule. We would then in 
fact as we are now in name be a self-governing nation. We 
are now a true democracy in name only. 

“The Imperative Mandate” should accompany Direct Leg¬ 
islation. It is the power of recalling an officer. It is the peo¬ 
ple’s right to vote out of office at any time men who fail to 
serve the public or are untrue to their pledges. 

SOME ADVANTAGES OF DIRECT RULE. 

There is no longer .any doubt in the minds of thoughtful, 
patriotic voters ff that some change must be made in our form 
of government or it will soon be unworthy to be called a re¬ 
public, The arguments set forth by present conditions are 
unanswerable. We are rapidly becoming a nation with a mon¬ 
eyed aristocracy on one hand and tenant farmers, day labor¬ 
ers and factory slaves on the other. A New York paper has 
recently published the names of four thousand three hundred 
millionaires. The money power—not the people—rule. No 
republic has ever endured such conditions, and never will. 

It remains to be seen whether the American people will be 
wise enough to adopt a peaceablebloodless change while they 
yet have the power, or whether we shall drift on to inevitable 
revolution. This must remain the serious question of our time. 

Direct Legislation, through the Initiative and Refenendnm, 
in brief possesses the following important advantages over 
our present so-called representative system : 

1 The people rule—not nominally but in fact. 

2 Issues—not candidates are discussed. 

3 Eliminates party rancor. 

4 Furnishes an effectual control for monopolies, combines, 

trusts and corporations. 

5 Does away with party domination and bossism. 

6 Gives us peopleism in place of partyism. 

7 Increases interest in citizenship by increasing the respon¬ 

sibility by direct voting. 

8 Substitutes stewardsfor rulers. 

9 Simplifies government, diminishes its cost. 

10 The people serve as their own representatives. 

11 Is a constant means of public education. 


The Twenty-six Reasons. 


17 


12 Renders ineffectual “corruption money" in politics. 

13 Every officer is subject to recall by his constituency. 

14 Under this system the rights of the weakest and poorest 

citizen are respected. 

15 Insures majority rule and minority representation. 

16 Antagonizes no other reform. 

17 The Initiative serves for the repeal of bad laws while 

the Referendum prevents the enactment of bad laws. 

18 If the people suffer from misrule or from needed legisla¬ 

tion under this system they have themselves to blame. 

19 Aids the adoption of almost every other good reform. 

20 Prevents power from vesting in officials and legislators. 

21 Reposes the veto power only with the people. 

22 Gives permanency to popular rule, and retires the pro¬ 

fessional politician and office seeker. 

23 Is a government by the people instead of by politicians. 

24 To oppose such a system is to oppose popular sovereignty. 

25 Every meritorious plank in either the republican, demo¬ 

cratic, populist or prohibition platforms would be more 
certain of speedy adoption under this system than under 
any other system known to the science of government. 

26 It is a just and fair system, and works no wrong to any 

section, class or individual; it is neither better nor worse 
than the people in their collective capacity ; it recog¬ 
nizes neither race nor color lines ; it sets no limit on 
custom, morality or religion ; it knows neither rich nor 
poor, high nor low. To use Lincoln’s oft-repeated words: 
“It is of the people,.by the people and for the people." 
Can as much be said for any other system of government ? 

A COMPARATIVE VIEW. 

The following is from “ The Rise of the Swiss Republic: " 
“Both the Initiative aud Referendum are mediums for the 
expression of the popular will, viewed from a different stand¬ 
point. The Referendum is a passive force ; it says merely 
“yes" or “ no, " and is essentially judicial in character. The 
Initiative, on the other hand, is an active, creative force ; it 
supplies the progressive element in the process of legislation, 
while the Referendum acts as a critical, controlling check 
upon the adoption of laws. Taken together these two institu¬ 
tions form the most perfect contrivance so far devised by a 
free people for the conduct of self-government. They create 





In Hell and the Way Out. 


a sort of political pendulum which oscillated in a groove 
strictly marked by the constitution.” 

WHAT WE COULD DO WITH DIRECT LEGISLATION. 

There are several important reforms that have been advo¬ 
cated for years by good and wise citizens of all parties, which 
are no nearer adoption to-day, under our present system, than 
when first proposed. 

With the Initiative and Referendum in operation this un¬ 
necessary and harrassing delay would have been avoidable. 
We would not now as for several years past be at the mercy 
of a lot of fourth-rate politicians who are working us for rev¬ 
enue only. 

By this system what could be more just, or in keeping with 
the principles of a pure democracy than the submission to the 
people for their “ yes ” or “ no ” the following questions : 

Do you favor a tariff in excess of the necessary expenses 
of the government, including present internal revenues ? 

Do you favor international reciprosity ? 

Are you in favor of the free and unlimited coinage of both 
gold and silver at the present ratio of 16 to i ? 

Do you favor a national currency issued by the general 
government without the intervention of banks which shall be 
a full legal tender for all debts ? 

Do you favor an increase of our circulating medium to $50. 
per capita ? 

Do you favor postal savings banks ? 

Should the government operate the railroads, telegraphs and 
telephones ? 

Do you favor a graduated property tax ? 

Should the government control the alcohol traffic ? 

Do you favor the exemption from taxation of every home 
to the value of $1000 ?—(an income tax to make up for this 
loss in revenue.) 

Should alien ownership of land be allowed ? 

Do you favor the taxation of unimproved lands the same as 
improved ? 

Should not all public officers be subject to recall ? . 

Should the school education of all children under 12 years 
of age be compulsory, and public aid given when necessary ? 

Should United States senators be elected by popular vote ? 












A System Long in Use. 


*9 


Do you favor the nationalization of the Standard Oil mo¬ 
nopoly and our coal mines? 

Should eight hours constitute a lawful day’s work ? 

Should civil service reform be applied to all departments of 
government ? 

NO MONEY IN THE MOVEMENT. 

There is one prominent feature with the Direct Legislation 
movement. There is no money in it for any one. It is not a 
job. There are no fat offices; it means simply to give the peo¬ 
ple the power they ought to have. Hence jobs will be pre¬ 
vented. The pay of fat offices will be ventilated. Politicians 
do not like it. They do not say they disapprove of it. That 
would not do. But they say it is not practicable, or that the 
people are not ready for it, or they smother it with silence. 
Whenever you see a well-informed person oppose Direct Leg¬ 
islation, you can be reasonably certain he has some selfish mo¬ 
tive in doing so. 

A BUSINESS PRINCIPLE. 

Does a successful business man employ a person to repre¬ 
sent him in any important matter when he feels assured that 
he can better represent himself ? 

In matters of government why should we employ a repre¬ 
sentative when we can be reasonably certain that he will be 
approached by the money power,'either directly or indirectly, 
and perhaps sell us out, when by the method of Direct Leg¬ 
islation, it is possible for us to represent ourselves? 

We must constantly bear in mind that conditions have ma¬ 
terially changed in recent years. It is a well known fact that 
we now have the “third house,” as the lobby is sometimes 
called. These new conditions demand new methods, and our 
present situation ought to be evidence that our legislative 
machinery is not only badly out of repair, but also out of date. 
How long must the masses go moneyless and miserable be¬ 
fore they come to realize this fact ? 

If all important questions could be referred directly to a 
vote of the people for their adoption or rejection, oppression 
in government — class favoritism — would be impossible. 
People would not vote the adoption of any oppressive meas¬ 
ure, and if they did so they would only have themselves to 
blame, and would have the same opportunity to repeal obnox¬ 
ious laws that they had in adopting them. 






20 


In Hell and the Way Out . 


II 


No nation can reasonably claim to be civilized that is inca- j 
pable of self-government;—if capable of self-government—it 
should have the opportunity—it should demand the right to j 
govern itself. 

A SYSTEM LONG IN USE. 

In deliberative bodies the Initiative and Referendum have I 
long prevailed. A person arises and addresses the chairman : 

“ I move we do this or that thing, etc.,” and, after discussion, 
the body votes on it, the majority deciding. 

Under the Initiative, either in national, state, county, town¬ 
ship or municipal affairs, a certain agreed number of petition¬ 
ers express approval of a measure, after which the entire 
body of voters indorse or reject the measure. 

The New England town meetings well illustrate this prin¬ 
ciple. On a limited scale they afford Direct Legislation in 
that the measures are discussed and voted on by the people 
independent of representatives. 

What is there impracticable about such a system, except j 
for boodlers, party bosses or professional place-hunters ? It 
would be next to impossible with such a method to thwart the 
will of the people,—even with the money power entrenched 
as it is to-day. In all the affairs of men superstition attaches 1 
to nothing else so tenaciously as to ideas on money and gov¬ 
ernment. Why, we have hardly outgrown the belief in the 
“divine right of kings.” 

When we consider how a few by cunning, sophistry and brute 
force have always succeeded in subverting the will of the 
many and in extortions of tribute, is it any wonder that the 
principle of “ direct rule by the people” has been so long de¬ 
layed ? 

DIRECT LEGISLATION IN SWITZERLAND. 

Perhaps no individual has labored with more untiring de¬ 
votion to and with greater success for the Referendum in this 
country than J. W. Sullivan, of New York. Three years ago 
Mr. Sullivan made a visit of several months to Switzerland 
to make a study of her institutions and form of government. 
His book, “Direct Legislation by the Citizenship, through the 
Initiative and Referendum,” embodies much information, and 
is considered the standard. It has been the means of making 
thousands of converts to the most advanced system of gov- 




What the Swiss Have Gained. 


21 


ernment now known to civilization. I quote the following 
from this work : 

“To briefly recount what the Swiss have accomplished by 
Direct Legislation : They have made it easy at any time to 
alter their cantonal and Federal constitutions. They have 
cleared from the way of majority rule every obstacle—priv¬ 
ilege of ruler, fetter of ancient law, power of legislator. They 
have simplified the structure of government, held their offi¬ 
cials as servants, rendered bureaucracy impossible, converted 
their representatives to simple committeemen, and have shown 
the parliamentary system not essential to law-making. They 
have written their laws in language so plain that a layman 
may be judge in the highest court. They have forestalled 
monopolies, improved and reduced taxation, avoided incurring 
heavy public debts, and have made a better distribution of 
their land than any other European country. They have 
practically given home rule in local affairs to every commu¬ 
nity. They have calmed disturbing political elements,—the 
press is purified, the politician disarmed, the civil service 
well regulated. 

Their citizen army of 475,000 sturdy men is perhaps the 
most efficient in all Europe, and its maintenance costs but 
$3,500,000 a year. The Swiss postal system exercises federal 
supervision over the railroads, express service, telegraphs and 
telephones, and is one of the best in the world.” 

GROWTH OF DIRECT LEGISLATION. 

According to the statements of Eltweed Pomeroy, the effi¬ 
cient editor of the Direct Legislation Record, of Newark, N. J., 
there are at this Writing thirty-eight different state platforms 
which advocate the Initiative and Referendum, and Propor¬ 
tional Representation. There are also more than three thous¬ 
and independent and reform newspapers advocating this new 
plan of political and industrial salvation. 

Almost every trade union in the United States has been out¬ 
spoken in advocacy of this reform, and many are making 
practical use of it in their own organizations. The National 
Woman’s Christian Temperance Union has also indorsed it. 

“ Direct rule of the people” is advocated by a large num¬ 
ber of civic, religious and benevolent societies, both protes- 
tant and catholic. 


22 In Hell and the Way Out. 

On the other side of the ocean the Social Democratic Party) 
of Germany, The Social Democratic League, of Holland) j 
the Labor Party of Belgium, the Socialistic Labor Party, O jj 
France as well as the Social Democratic Federation of Eng 
land, are all working for the Initiative and Referendum! 
The agitation has also begun in good earnest in both Aus-i 
tralia aud New Zeland. . 

Such prominent English papers as the following are advo¬ 
cates of the measure : The London Spectator, The Contempo¬ 
rary Review, The National Review , The London Daily Chron¬ 
icle, Times and Echo and The Clarion. 

Every socialist in Europe, almost without exception, is clam¬ 
oring for Direct Legislation, and this means about half the j 
population, judging from recent election returns. 

Perhaps no other political reform ever made so great pro- j 
gress in so short a time. The movement is scarcely more 
than three years old in the United States, and already a for¬ 
midable array of books and other literature, bearing on the 
subject, has been published. It is safe to say that no other 
issue to-day is regarded with so much importance by honest 
voters of all parties, for it is a generally admitted fact that 
Direct Legislation serves as the most practical means for the 
adoption of all other meritorious reforms. It supplies the 
simple, practical, political machinery necessary to insure the 
“ rule of the people,” and that ought to be sufficient glory for ; 
any reform. j 


Among the more recent books on this subject I will mention 
the following : 

The Swiss Republic, by Boyd Winchester. 

The Swiss Confederation, by Adams and Cunningham. 
Suggestions on Government, by S. E. Moffett. 

Swiss Solutions of American Problems, W. D. McCrackan. 
The Rise of the Swiss Republic, same author. 

Direct Legislation, by the Citizenship, Through the Initia¬ 
tive and Referendum, by J. W. Sullivan. 

The Federal Government of Switzerland, by Benard Moses. 
State and Federal Government of Switzerland, by John 
Martin Vincent, Ph. D., Johns Hopkins University. 

Bond and Industrial Slavery, by E. A. Twitched. 

The Little Statesman, by J. F. Schulte. 







Direct Legislation Leagues. 


23 


Hail Referendum, the Shortest Way to Democracy, Alex. 
M. Thompson, London. 

The People or the Politician ? by R. L. Taylor. 

The following well known publications have recently con¬ 
tained able and lengthy discussions on Direct Legislation : 

The Arena , The Westminster Review, The International 
Journal , and The North Americafi Review. 

Among the metropolitan newspapers that were first to in¬ 
dorse this “ reform of reforms ” was the New York Sun and 
the Denver News. 


The Direct Legislation National Conference, which met in 
St. Louis, July 22, 1896, was called by ten thousand repre¬ 
sentative citizens, many of whom are prominent reformers 
and sociologists, and from almost every State and Territory in 
the Union. The list of vice-presidents comprised such well- 
known economists as Henry George, Postmaster-General 
Wilson, ex-Postmaster-General Wannamaker, Henry D. Lloyd, 
Wm. P. St. John, B. O. Flower, Wm. J. Bryan, W. H. Harvey, 
and others. 

This conference resulted in the permanent organization of 
a Direct Legislation National League. It decided that a 
State League be organized at once in every State and Terri¬ 
tory, and that the work be pushed rapidly. 

The Populist convention, which met in St. Louis the same 
date, is the first national convention outside of Switzerland 
to adopt Direct Legislation. It marks the most advanced 
step ever taken on American soil by any national gathering 
in the direction of pure democracy. 

Hon. Wm. J. Bryan, the nominee of three conventions for 
president, is one of the pioneer advocates of Direct Legisla¬ 
tion. He was selected by the New Jersey Direct Legislation 
League, and the Nebraska delegation to urge the adoption of 
a Direct-Legislation plank in the National Democratic conven¬ 
tion platform at Chicago. 

SOME ADVOCATES OF THE NEW REFORM. 

I It is safe to say that the most advanced and progressive 
j thinkers, the world over, are to-day in favor of “the rule of 
j the people.” The list is so extended that I will attempt, in 
a brief work of this kind, to give but a few representative 




24 


In Hell and the Way Oat. 


names. Many of these names are known to millions of ou ( 
people as honest, sincere reformers, and represent almost even; 
shade of religious, social and political belief : ^ 


John Clark Ridpath, LL D., 
Judge Albion W. Tourgee, 

B. O. Flower, 

T. V. Powderly, 

Samuel Gompers, 

Gov. John P. Altgeld, 

Mayor Hazen S. Pingree, 
Mayor Sutro, 

Henry D. Lloyd, 

Clarence S. Darrow, 

David Ward Wood, 

Ignatius Donnelly, 

William Morris, 

John Burns 
J. Keir Hardie 
Ex-Gov, Larrabee, 

W. H. Harvey, 

Jane Addams, 

Milton George, 

Judge Goggin, 

President George A. Gates, 
Gen. J. B. Weaver, 

Robert Holliway, 
Congressman Howard, 
Edward Bellamy, 

Henry George, 

Judge Henry Caldwell, 

Judge Pentecost, 

Ex-Gov. Fishback, 

John Swinton, 

Hon. Thomas McEwan, Jr., 
Hon. George L. Smith, 

Gov. John W. Griggs, 
Ex-Gov. David H. Waite, 
Hon. R. W. Irwin, 

Prof. Edward W. Bemis, 
Senator Tillman, 

Judge McConnell, 

Senator Peffer, 

Senator Marion Butler, 

Hon. J. R. Rogers, 

Rev. Myron W. Reed, 

S. S. King, 

Mayor Samuel M. Jones, 

R. L. Taylor, 

Prof, James Rodes Buchanan, 

Prof, Frank Parsons, 


Editor J. A. Wayland, 

Jesse Cox, 

Mrs. Mary E. Lease, 

Thomas J. Morgan, 

Edwin D. Mead, 

Hon. Henry Winn, 

W. H. Bennington, 

Samuel J. Sloan, 

Rev. Hiram Vrooman, 
Editor Sheridan Webster, 
Henry R. Legate, 

Dr. Emil G. Hirsch, 

John Willcox, 

Nelson O, McClees, 

Dr. Charles J. Lewis, 

Otto Thum, 

Dr. Rusk, 

President Charles W. Eliot, 
Judge B. J. Peters, 

Rev. Myron Haynes, 

Walter Brenn, 

George P. Keeney, 

Dr. Schuyler Champion, 
Judge Quincy, 

Frankin M. Sprague, 

John J. McGrath, 

Editor Eltweed Pomeroy, 
Dr. Bayard Holmes, 

Matilda Joslyn Gage, 
Ex-Gov. Pennoyer, 

Dr. J. H. Acton, 

Senator Mitchell, 

J. J. Ryan, 

Frank Crane, 

W. C, Pomeroy, 

Robert Lindblom, 

Prof. John R. Commons, 
Rev. B. Fay Mills, 

Lord Salisbury, 

W. H. H. Lecky, 

Sir Wilfrid Laurier, 

Hon. Arthur J. Balfour, 

Lord Rosebery, 

George Fred Williams, 

Rev. Alexander Kent, 

Hon. R. F. Pettigrew, 

Col. David B. Henderson. 






Some Friends of Direct Legislation. 


25 


Gov. Horace Boies, 

Prof. George D. Herron, 
Hon. William J. Bryan, 
Helen Campbell, 

Gov. Holcomb, 

Senator Allen, 

Congressman Kerr, 

Col. Augustus Jacobson, 
Moses Harman, 

Thomas A. Edison, 

William Stead, 

W. H. Van Ornum, 

William Blatchford, 

Senator W. S. Vanderburg, 
Gov. Matthews, 

Gen. Paul Vondervoort, 

Dr. Edward McGlynn, 
Samuel Putnam, 

Robert G. Schilling, 

J. F. Willitts, 

Dr. Alice B. Stockham, 
Thaddeus B. Wakeman. 
Thomas V. Cator, 

Edward Evans, 

Senator Teller, 

A. M. Todd, 

Tom Watson, 

S. F. Norton, 

A. S. Edwards, 

Edward L. Lindholm, 
Postmaster-General Wilson 
H. B. Martin, 

Rev. D. Oglesby, 

A. L. Maxwell, 

Alonzo Wardal, 

Prof. R. T. Ely, 

B. F. Underwood, 

Rev. H. W. Thomas, 


Hon. J. Warner Mills, 

Mrs. Helen Gougar, 

Rev. E. P. Wise, 

Margaret Holmes Bates, 

Casca St.John, 

Eugene V. Debs, 

Prof. Thomas E. Hill, 

Senator Wm. M. Stewart, 

Mrs. M. A. Freeman, 

J. F. Adams, 

Ed. E. Chamberlain, 

C. H. McClure, 

Florence E. Kelly, 

Dr. Lyman J. Abbott, 

Rev. Washington Gladden, D. D., 
Elizabeth Cady Stanton, 

Frances E. Willard, 
Ex-Postmaster-Gen. Wanamaker, 
Charles Dudley Warner, 

Lyman Trumbull, 

Prof. Copeland, 

W. D. Howells, 

Col. Robert G. Ingersoll, 

Justice Walter Clark, LL. D., 
CbarlesX. Mathews, 

Rev. James H. Lathrop, 

Dr. C. F. Taylor, 

Morrison B. Swift, 

W. T. Wallace, 

Helen H. Gardner, 

William P. St. John, 

F. J. Eddy, 

W. S. U’Ren, 

George H. Strobell, 

J. W. Sullivan, 

Dr. E. B. Foote, 

Alfred W. Westrup, 

Ex-Gov. John P. St. John. 


THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SELF GOVERNMENT. 

The Declaration of Independence is said to be the first gen¬ 
eral enunciation in the world’s history of the principle of self- 
government. 

The nearest approach to an ideal government must be 
when an intelligent people absolutely rule themselves, and 
the evolution of free government has undeniably been along 
this line. 

Direct Legislation is to-day the most practical known 


2 6 


In Hell and the Way Out ; 


method for carrying out the idea of popular sovereignty, it 
supplies every necessary arrangement for absolute rule by the 
people, without interference of any outside authority. 

It is the long-sought principle in the science of government 
which has been denied the people of the old world by the 
force of a mob of plunderers and self-appointed rulers. 

In our republic the principle of direct self-rule has not been 
adopted for the reason that our representative system was 
reasonably successful until the money power began its crusade 
of corruption and debauchery to influence legislation in its 
own interests. So long as we have this comparatively new 
element in politics to contend with can any well-informed per¬ 
son honestly claim that it is as likely for the people to se¬ 
cure and maintain their rights through a system of represen¬ 
tation as through a system of direct voting, or self-represen¬ 
tation ? 

While it is not uncommon to influence the voting in a legis¬ 
lature or in our congress, it is practically impossible for the 
money power to control the whole people. As Abraham 
Lincoln said : “ You can trust all the people a great deal more 
than you can trust some of the people.” 

It is a well substantiated fact that people have not been al¬ 
lowed in many ways the exercise of their rights under our so- 
called representative system ; why should they expect to re¬ 
gain them through the same faulty, money-controlled system ? 

When I hear a person contend (which is very seldom) that 
the people could not rule themselves as well as the politicians 
have ruled them, I invariably find that such a person has an 
eye on some office, or is enjoying some advantage which he 
has reason to fear will be done away with under popular rule. 

Distrust the man who distrusts the people, and do not ac¬ 
cept pomposity for argument from those who have a selfish 
interest in maintaining present conditions. Direct Legislation 
has come in time, if given a chance, to save the leading re¬ 
public of the new world. The duty of the hour is plain. 

BEST METHOD FOR MUNICIPAL CONTROL. 

It is a fact that no well-informed person will attempt to\ 
deny that the city government of New York, Chicago, Phila- * 
delphia, and others of our large cities, is notoriously corrupt. 

Only 3 short time ago it is said Charles Yerkes made the 



Best Plan for City Government. 


*7 


statement that he would not accept twenty-five million dollars 
for the franchises presented to him by the city of Chicago, 
through her “boodle aldermen.” Not one city of importance 
in the United States controls its own franchises, while in Eng¬ 
land at least forty-three do so. It would seem from this re¬ 
cord that although our “ city folk ” may not have so much as 
one hay-seed in their hair, after all they haven’t sense enough 
to rule themselves and keep the corporations off their necks. 
The city of Glasgow enjoys a better street-car service than 
either New York or Chicago, and has a two-cent fare. 

Millions for corporations, but the dear people must not be 
indulged in anything that even savors of public control or 
ownership;—it would be dangerous—to corporations. Of all 
that has been given away in franchises the city of Chicago is 
to-day without any means of raising revenues except taxation. 
Is it not about time to ring in a change ? Otherwise the people 
may soon have to pay for the privilege of walking on the 
streets of the corporations. 

Duluth, Minn., is the first city in the United States to make 
a practical test of the Referendum, as far as I am informed. 
I give a brief account of her experience in the hope that the 
reader may use his influence to compel every other#city to 
pursue a similar course in the interest of all the people : 

In Minnesota, cities cannot issue bonds or levy taxes be¬ 
yond a certain amount unless submitted to and approved by 
the people. The water supply of Duluth was owned by a pri¬ 
vate company, and the service was not satisfactory. A year 
ago the water company offered to sell its plant for $1,856,000. 

It ended by four propositions being submitted to the peo¬ 
ple. The two principal newspapers took opposite sides. The 
matter was discussed with great fullness. The political par¬ 
ties did not take sides. Men of all parties served on the com¬ 
mittees. Although the unanswered and apparently well- 
proved charge was made that the plant had not cost the com¬ 
pany stockholders a tenth of the amount they asked, the per¬ 
sonalities in the discussion were few. It was mainly of facts, 
methods and policy, and was very educational. 

The propositions were : first, to issue bonds for $1,856,000 
to buy or build a water plant; second, to purchase the exist¬ 
ing plant; third, to build ; fourth, to issue $850,000 of bonds to 
improve existing plant, should the second proposition be car- 




28 In Hell and the Way Out. 

ried. The first and third propositions were carried and the 
second and fourth defeated ; the vote stood about 3 to i fin 
favor of building a new plant. » 

The Duluth News-Tribune , which favored buying and op¬ 
posed building, said: “ No loud disputes, and no bitter words 
were, as a rule, heard during election day. The campaign 
leaders were content to rest on their laurels as stump speak ¬ 
ers, and the rest of the people were content to sustain their 
reputations as quiet, orderly citizens.” 

The Duluth Herald , which opposed buying and favored 
building, said ; “ It was the largest vote ever poled at a special 
election in Duluth. The strong arguments in favor of build¬ 
ing an independent plant, and against the attempt to foist the 
company’s plant upon the city at an. exorbitant price, were all 
powerful.” 

It will be seen that this election was a campaign of educa¬ 
tion, but without party rancor or mud-slinging ; there were 
no charges of corruption ; the will of the people was definitely 
and clearly shown, and was promptly acquiesced in by both 
sides. 

Will the reader contrast this popular decision of a large city 
with the methods generally carried into practice in the admin¬ 
istration of city affairs both in New York and Chicago ? The 
difference between civilization and barbarism is scarcely more 
marked. Think of an alderman paying $25000 in election 
expenses, for the privilege of fleecing the public,^—and even 
at this figure making a profitable deal ? Think of it—and the 
headquarters of nearly all our foreign mission societies are 
located in these two cities ! 

Direct Legislation at once furnishes the solution to the 
vexed problem of municipal government. If such a method 
could be adopted how soon the reign of the boodler would 
cease. Municipal corruption would no longer disgrace the 
nation. 

The recent vote in Chicago on the Torrens Title Registry 
System was the Referendum in practical use. Why should 
not the granting of every franchise be submitted to the peo¬ 
ple in the same manner? 

If the Civic Federation could have had the good judgment 
to work along this line—giving the people a voice in the dis¬ 
posal of their own property—how much more they could have 


Want of Confidence in the System. 29 

accomplished with the same effort. The charge could not 
then have reasonably been made that this organization is only 
an annex to the political machine—the same contrivance, 
whether run by one party or the other, or both—that has for 
so many years been grinding away regardless of public inter¬ 
est or even common decency. 

Now, what shall we think of either newspapers or individ¬ 
uals who will support this “ boodle system” in preference to 
the Referendum ? The public should expect to be fleeced so 
long as it supports fleecers. 

Will the metropolitan dailies advocate the cause of the peo¬ 
ple, or will they continue to advocate the cause of corrupt, 
municipal politics ? Let the people begin the agitation now. 
Hold meetings, and your Civic Federation, if it is sincere in 
its pledges of loyalty to the people, will turn its influence for 
the Referendum. The people’s cause will then soon become 
the popular cause, and the business of the franchise giver 
will no longer inflict a patient and long-suffering people. 

Detroit, under the gallant leadership of Mayor Hazen S. 
Pingree, (also candidate for governor of Michigan,) has made 
a very creditable fight against corporate rule, and Milwaukee 
has shown considerable resistance of late against the corporate 
strangulation process, now too common in nearly all American 
cities. As usual the daily newspapers are on the side of the 
money power in both of these cities. You know the remedy ? 

WANT OF CONFIDENCE IN THE SYSTEM. 

If the reader has never tried this experiment it will be found 
an interesting pastime : make inquiry of your business ac¬ 
quaintances whether they have confidence in our so-called rep¬ 
resentative system, and if they believe in the honesty of pol¬ 
iticians ? The test maysusprise you. 

You will find that not one out of a dozen will express confi¬ 
dence and satisfaction in the present system. 

This deplorable change is the result of nearly a quarter of 
a century of class legislation. Want of public confidence in 
the honest and just administration of .the law is always a seri¬ 
ous matter, and so far as I know has preceeded and heralded 
every revolution and down-fall in government. May our un¬ 
fortunate condition be a happy exception. 


In Hell and the Way Out . 


30 

It has been charged that we have an “elective despotism.” 
“All power,” says Benjamin Rush, “is derived from the peo¬ 
ple. They possess it only on the days of election. After that 
it is the property of their rulers.” The rulers of course use 
it as their property ; they have paid for it in their election ex¬ 
penses and work, and why should they not use it and sell it 
for the best price ?—and they do. 

Some one has said that the government of Russia is a des¬ 
potism tempered by assassination. Our government seems to 
be an elective despotism tempered by frequent elections of 
despots with no power of recall. In this connection Eltweed 
Pomeroy has well expressed this idea : 

“ Reformers may win some temporary or small concession, 
but they cannot secure any thorough and lasting reform on 
any line while we have rulers over us who are human and 
susceptible of being bought. You have tried it, keep on trying 
it till you are convinced that even your own party leaders 
will fail you when put to the extreme test. Put your trust in 
the common people. You have gone from one party to an¬ 
other and have believed their promises. Have they fulfilled 
them ? Why be at the mercy of any clique or party ? Educate 
the people up to the reform of Direct Legislation, and you 
will find that it will not be ‘wrung back from you by some 
silent and unnoticed power,’ but it will be permanent and 
abiding because you have the whole people behind it.” 

Direct Legislation would purify government and restore 
general confidence in its administration. 

ISSUES, NOT PARTY FEALTY. 

I take the following from S. E. Moffett’s very able book, 
“ Suggestions on Government.” Mr. Moffett is the editor of 
the San Francisco Examiner: 

“ Suppose, for instance, that my ideas of a national “policy” 


quantitatively expressed, run like this : 

Tariff reform - 100 

Favorable to free silver coinage - - 99 

Economy in government - 80 

Favorable to postal savings banks - - 50 

Extention of civil service laws - - 50 

Government control of railroads - - 40 

Total - •» » 


Evils of Partyism. 


31 


Suppose that one party meets my wishes on tariff reform 
and economy (180) and the other party on silver, postal banks 
and government control of railroads (189), while neither takes 
a satisfactory position on civil service (50), Then if I vote 
for my party, I vote for a policy of which I approve of only 
180 parts and disapprove of 239; and if I vote for the other, 
I vote for a policy of which I approve of only 189 parts and 
disapprove of 230. Thus my net satisfaction is 50 less than 
nothing in one case and 41 less than nothing in the other. 
And moreover, the situation is almost certain to be still fur¬ 
ther complicated by the nomination of candidates whom I do 
not consider fit to hold office, but for whom I must vote as 
the only way of exerting an influence on the choice of any 
policy at all. If the people were allowed to vote on measures 
as well as on men, I could exert my full power at the polls in 
favor of the whole 419 points of the policy I desired to see 
carried out, and in addition, I could'vote for the candidate I 
thought best qualified for legislative business, regardless of 
his opinions on disputed political issues.” 

PARTYISM RESTRAINS INTELLIGENT ACTION. 

Under a direct system of voting, political parties will be dis¬ 
continued, as has been the case in Switzerland. Independent, 
intelligent action on the the part of the voter will make them 
unnecessary. 

I for one have lost all confidence in political parties and 
party newspapers. There is no depth of infamy to which both 
will not descend to gain some party advantage, Which may be 
opposed to the interest of the people. Again and again we have 
seen these influences, especially in cities, become the dupes of 
the money power—the “ gold ring.” We have seen the most 
disreputable characters transformed into party bosses, and 
candidates selected with no other qualification on earth but 
their ability to contribute to the campaign fund. We have 
seen so many corporation lawyers sent to the senate—by their 
corporations, that the anomalous spectacle no longer arouses 
public indifference. 

We have tried the expedient of political parties—and with 
what success ? Let present conditions be the answer! 

Is it even likely or possible for any real improvement to 
come under the domination of any party so long us we remain 


32 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


at the mercy of representatives who are susceptible of influ¬ 
ence by the money power ? But the reader may resent this 
imputation of dishonesty and disloyalty on the part of our so- 
called representatives. Is more conclusive proof demanded 
than that furnished by the history of legislation for the past 
twenty years—both state and national? 

From this time forth I expect to fight for the opportunity 
to represent myself. If I was in Cuba I would be an insurgent, 
and a nihilist if I was in Russia. Any individual who will 
make no effort to better his condition—to enjoy at least some 
of the advantages and luxuries of modern life—is not entitled 
to the respect and consideration due an American voter. 

I want to see a political system inaugurated in which meas¬ 
ures—not men—will be discussed ; in which party rancor and 
corruption will be but an unpleasant recollection. I want to 
see independent, political action take the place of partisan 
prejudice and bigotry. I desire to help bequeath a political 
system to posterity that will reflect something of intelligence, 
manhood and honesty; that will at least possess the rudiments 
of justice and fair play. I want it truthfully said that in the 
leading republic of the new world the law is the will of the 
people. 

Reader, let us mutually pledge ourselves that we will never 
knowingly vote again for any candidate for any office who is 
not fully committed to Direct Legislation ? 

THE PRESENT POLITICAL SITUATION. 

The campaign of 1896 will be pronounced the greatest 
political monstrosity of our time. 

The people in their collective capacity are utterly power¬ 
less to vote their preferences at the polls. I mean by this 
that it is impossible for a citizen in this campaign to vote for 
the measures he would like to see enacted into law. 

The voter may believe in a high tariff, free coinage of sil¬ 
ver, an income tax, government control of the alcohol traffic, 
postal savings banks, and other questions which no political 
party to-day advocates. In fact there is no political party 
that does not advocate some one or more measures to which 
many voters will object, and no platform contains all the re¬ 
forms the voter may deem expedient and important of adop-> 
tion at this time. 


Our Present Political Situation. 


33 


Then who believes in the promises of political parties? 
—Surely not any well-informed voter. We know also that 
candidates—not measures—are, in too many instances, the 
subjects of discussion. The personnel of candidates would be 
a secondary matter if voters were assured that party pledges 
would be faithfully carried out. But the whole matter turns 
on the question of the individual honesty of the candidates. 

Now, why should we support a system that depends for its 
usefulness to the people on the common honesty of a few pol¬ 
iticians ? Isn’t that a point of sufficient weakness in the sys¬ 
tem to justify its disuse ? 

Our present system virtually compels a citizen to vote his 
indorsement of a mass of party clap-trap in order to register 
his wish on only one or two planks of the platform, the bal¬ 
ance of which he does not indorse. There are now six parties; 
each one may be contending for some one or more reforms 
we indorse, and will not be able to vote on because it is not 
included in the platform of the party to which we will give 
our vote. So, in any case, we are deprived of our full vote— 
disfranchised that far. 

The reader must see from this situation how defective our 
political system is—if indeed it can properly be called a sys¬ 
tem,—leaving entirely out of consideration the influences we 
know are brought to bear to favor the classes against the 
masses. How much in advance of such a system is the Swiss 
method of Direct Legislation which allows the citizen to vote 
for any measure or measures properly initiated by the voters 
themselves, regardless of either party or candidates. 

When we take into account the fact that our representatives 
are quite likely to utterly ignore the wishes of their constitu¬ 
ency when thoroughly installed in office, then we cannot 
fail to see what “a howling farce, played to the galleries,” our 
so-called representative system is. 

Would not the people be better off without any representa¬ 
tion if legislation is to be conducted in the future as in the 
past—if the people’s interests are simply to be made a matter 
of barter by their elected delegates ? 

Is it reasonable to support a political system that has 
proven to be almost thoroughly worthless since the advent of 
the money power—that posesses scarcely one redeeming fea¬ 
ture ? Why do we vote to deprive the people of self-rule ? 


A 

34 In Hell and the Way Out. 

Reader, you are doing this when you cast your vote for any 
candidate not pledged to Direct Legislation. 

Is it not actually treason to vote to keep the people under 
a political representative system that, principally represents 
corporations and monopolies? Slaves to party, or those who 
may be reaping advantage from the present system, may 
pretend to see no injustice in such a course. But is it not 
time to stop and consider the consequences of our acts ? What 
kind of a political inheritance are we leaving our children ? 
—bonds and bondage. What will be the verdict of history if 
this system continues? Will it not designate this as the “easy 
age ?” Can we afford to allow this farce to continue ? 

THE MIDDLEMAN IN POLITICS. 

Eltweed Pomeroy has well said: “We have done away 
with the middleman in religion. A man can worship as he 
pleases (except in Tennessee), We have done away with the 
middleman in intellectual life; a man can think as he pleases, 
and in most cases, read what he pleases. We have done away 
with the middleman in politics to a certain extent only. The 
people themselves must have the final say on all laws which 
are to govern them, then will the people have complete self- 
government. ” 

Mr. Pomeroy, in the course of a lengthy magazine article, 
says further under this head : 

“ The path has been blazed in this country by the New Eng¬ 
land town-meeting ; by the method of ratifying the funda¬ 
mental law of the land, the national and state constitutions; 
by many thousands of local Referendums; by the experience 
of the trade unions. The path has been made plain and 
straight and buttressed by the experience of the model repub¬ 
lic of the old world, mountain-pierced, freedom-saturated 
Switzerland. 

The principle at the bottom of this is that a suitable minor¬ 
ity of the people may demand that any law passed by the 
law-making body shall be referred to a poll of the people in¬ 
terested, and also that a suitable minority of the people may 
.initiate any law for their governance which, after fit discussion, 
shall go to a poll of the whole people interested, and their 
decision shall, in both cases, be final. 

The first is called the Referendum, referring to the people; 


The Middleman in Politics. 


35 


the second, the initiative, the starting of a law. The Refer¬ 
endum is negative, preventive ; the initiative is positive, con¬ 
structive. The two together constitute Direct Legislation in 
distinction to our present system of indirect legislation, where 
the people give the complete control of legislation to men se¬ 
lected nominally by the people, but really by party managers. 
Through Direct Legislation the people can have the com¬ 
plete and constant control of the making of laws which gov¬ 
ern them. This is self-government. It is the necessary step 
toward larger social and economic freedom. 

At present the state legislatures may impose on a city or 
locality any new charter or law they see fit. Under Direct 
Legislation, any locality alone could veto any measure passed 
by the legislature which applied to it alone. It could make 
for itself laws which it needs to govern itself. This means 
complete local self-government. It is full adherance to the 
wise saying : ‘Where the law is administered there it should 
be made.’ 

Hence, the first step toward the freedom of the nation, the 
state, the locality, the individual, is the complete autonomy of 
each division of the body politic, from the nation down to the 
smallest locality and the individual, to be obtained through 
Direct Legislation. Complete local self-government thus and 
thus only is obtainable. By it the people’s will can easily be 
found and quickly and surely embodied into law. 

A century ago the statement of grand principles enchained 
the people. We have learned much in a century, Among 
other things we have learned that would-be rulers often state 
grand and glorious principles before they are elected, and 
when elected, they fail almost as often to carry them out. 

Direct Legislation is the method of doing away with rulers 
and getting servants in their place ; of getting self-govern¬ 
ment and not government by others-even if nominally chosen 
from our midst ; of getting true freedom in government. It 
can be applied to the smallest hamlet or the mightiest nation. 
So let us insist on this method, this first step toward a truer 
and nobler freedom, a grander and more glorious Liberty.” 

HOW CAN WE SECURE DIRECT LEGISLATION? 

The advocates of Direct Legislation in Kansas are circu¬ 
lating pledges, which is a most excellent plan of propaganda. 


3 6 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


Every reformer should refuse to vote for any candidate, even 
on his own ticket, who is not favorable to Direct Legislation, 
for it is the basis of a truly free government. The Kansas 
pledge is printed on a card, and worded as follows : 

PLEDGE OF THE DIRECT LEGISLATION LEAGUE, OF KANSAS. 

No..... Date . / 

If the candidate of my party for State Senator or Rep¬ 
resentative refuses to public ally pledge himself, that if elected, 
he will vote for the submission of the question of Direct Leg¬ 
islation {as an amendment to the State Constitutiofi) to a 
direct vote of the people , then I pledge myself for the candi¬ 
date of any other party who will so pledge himself 

H. F. Nolte, Republican, President. 

R. Lindenberger, Democrat, Vice Pres. 

Chas. D. Hillabold, Populist, Secretary. 

Name . P. O .. '■ 

On the reverse side of the pledge-card is printed the con¬ 
stitution of the League. Object: “The adoption of the sys¬ 
tem of Direct Legislation as embodied in the Initiative and 
Referendum and Imperative Mandate in the law-making of 
the State of Kansas.” 

Then follows some brief statements relating to “member¬ 
ship,” “dues,” “officers/’ and “duties of officers.” There are 
no salaried officers, and the expenses are to be met by volun¬ 
tary contributions. No two officers are to be of the same po¬ 
litical party, which is a good provision. The Kansas plan is 
certainly a good one, and should be adopted in every State 
and Territory. 

In voting for members of congress it is equally important 
that they shall be pledged to Direct Legislation. See that no 
candidate for congress receives your vote who is unwilling for 
you to have the opportunity to register a “ no” or “ yes” on 
every important measure. Any candidate unwilling to grant 
every voter this right gives what ought to be conclusive proof 
that he is not a fit person to be intrusted with public interests. 
I will put it in another way : such a candidate furnishes the 
proof that he is neither a true republican, democrat, populist 
nor prohibitionist,—he is simply a demagogue who does not 






Governments Always Favor Some. 37 

believe in a true democracy, and should go’straight to Russia 
where he belongs. 

Your local editors should be able and willing to give the 
pledges of all candidates on your ticket. The candidate that 
will make no pledges—especially for congress—should cer¬ 
tainly be turned down, and his party affiliations should make 
no difference—he is unworthy of suffrage. 

FAVORITISM IN GOVERNMENT. 

When we think how the people for centuries have been im¬ 
posed upon by their rulers ; have been dragged into battle ; 
have famished in dungeons and prisons ; have lived in squalor 
and poverty all their life-times, simply that a few might live 
in idleness and dissipation—and laugh at the folly of the fools 
they ruled—it is not surprising that the principle of “ self-rule 
by the people” should have failed of adoption until the close 
of the nineteenth century. 

The abuse of power has always been by the few—never by 
the many. The effort of the few has always been to subju¬ 
gate the will of the many for porposes of tribute and extor¬ 
tion. The people have become accustomed to this order of 
things so long that many consider all governments possess 
but three functions,—the power to tax, punish and restrain. 
That governments might be made helpful in securing and 
maintaining just and humane conditions—might be made to 
serve the masses as well as the classes—seems a trifle modern. 

Power and advantage are never voluntarily surrendered. 
The reader will no doubt see many illustrations of this fact in 
the adoption of this reform. “ The direct rule of the people” 
will be opposed by nearly all who are reaping advantage from 
the present rule of the politicians and the money power. 
Every form of oppression invariably struggles long and dies 
hard. This will be no exception. 

The working people—the wage slaves—are becoming pros¬ 
trate at the feet of political and economic oppression to-day. 
Our middle classes are struggling under a load of debt and 
unfavorable conditions which must eventually bring them to 
the same miserable end. Senator Tillman recently said: “This 
country is going to hell.”—Is it not already there ? 

I see but one hope— “the rule of the people.” 

Complete self-government can break the jaws of corporate 


3« 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


and monopoly greed, and drive forever from our shores the 
vampires of extortion and privilege. 

Shall we be serfs or masters of the situation? Shall we be 
narrow partisans and finally sacrifice all; or patriotic freemen, 
and stand for the welfare of the great, common people ? 

WHY THE PRESENT SYSTEM WILL NOT DO. 

We must not forget that during the past twenty years many 
new conditions have arisen. Our rapid increase in popula¬ 
tion, the centralization of wealth, as well as other conditions, 
have forced new questions upon us for settlement. I hold 
that our present political machinery is no more adequate 
to meet these new demands than is the hand-rake harvester 
of twenty years ago to fill the requirements of the modern 
steel binder. 

Take for example the one condition of machinery-displaced 
labor. We know that countless labor-saving devices are turn¬ 
ing thousands adrift every week on the labor market, and the 
demand for labor is decreasing in proportion to our increase 
in population, The sources for employment upon which work¬ 
ingmen have always depended are failing us—a condition no 
other age has known. If the means of earning a living are 
being curtailed and gradually narrowed down it must be evi¬ 
dent w r e will soon have an enormous and permanent army of 
unemployed—in fact we have it now\ 

This condition gives rise to another serious question : if so¬ 
ciety withholds from a portion of the people (for virtually that 
is what it does) the means of a living it is equivalent to a de¬ 
nial of the right to live. Hence it would appear there is no 
longer room on the earth for the moneyless man—at least on 
any portion of it under plutocratic rule. In thousands of cases 
the enforced idler cannot get work. He can’t live and he can’t 
die. He must not beg and he must not steal.—Think of such 
conditions in the midst of abundance ! —is it any wonder that 
hell is losing its terrors ? 

What prospect is there that under our present system these 
problems will even be manfully met—to say nothing of being 
solved ? But nothing can be more certain than this fact): these 
questions must be solved if our government endures. Force may 
do for a time ; but it will at last fail as it has always failed. 
A hungry man in any country is a desperate man—a dan- 


Why the Present System Will Not Do. 


39 


gerous man. Extreme wealth invariably rests beneath the out¬ 
stretched arm of force.—“From Moscow to Alexandria,” says 
Henry D. Lloyd, “every step of the way is strewn with the 
graves of those who have tried to solve the problem of gov¬ 
ernment by force.” 

The centralization of capital is another danger our present 
system has done everything to intensify and nothing to ame¬ 
liorate. One per cent, of our population now controls more 
property than the remaining ninety-nine per cent,—the classes 
becoming richer, the masses becoming poorer. The present 
system is utterly powerless to right these conditions—in fact 
the majority of those who defend the present system, and are 
reaping advantage from its inequalities affirm that it is “ God- 
ordained.” Slavery was also God-ordained, and every form 
of oppression since the world began has found its defenders 
among the rich and their lackies. 

Again, is our present system efficient for the control of the 
monopolies, trusts, combines and corporations which are al¬ 
ready masters in almost every important industry ? Is it not 
a fact that these industrial vampires were nurtured into life 
under the fostering care of our dominent political parties ? 
To be still more explicit, are not these essentials of wealth 
really the unwelcome off-spring of the republican party?—In 
all the years this party was in full control of congress what 
action was ever taken to protect public interests against syn¬ 
dicate greed and!extt>rtion ?—absolutely none . 

The democratic party can take to itself no credit for its re¬ 
cord on anti-monopoly legislation. Its present national plat¬ 
form is perhaps the strongest declaration on this subject ever 
made by this party, while the republican platform as usual en¬ 
tirely ignores the whole matter. But this party could not do 
otherwise, the wealth that controls it would not permit. 

Then we have the problem of taxation. Will any one claim 
that wealth is paying a fair and just proportion of the taxes, 
or has ever done so ? The decision on the income tax law 
ought to serve as proof of the utter inefficiency of our present 
legislative methods in the interest of the people. 

We have not yet attempted any solution of the race prob¬ 
lem. Turn as we may we have continually to face the dis¬ 
agreeable fact that more than one-tenth of our population is 
polored, and about seven millions of these people are scarcely 


40 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


able to read and write, and are increasing with the character¬ 
istic fecundity of some of the lower animals. To our shame 
and disgrace what has been done for these millions except 
turn them loose out of slavery like a lot of cattle ? What is 
likely to be done—what can be done—under the present sys¬ 
tem to avert the racial difficulties that are almost certain to 
arise in the near future ? 

To-day we number at least seventy million people, nat¬ 
urally industrious, contented and frugal, occupying the most 
productive country on earth, and not one out of a dozen is 
satisfied with the way things are going, and not one out of a 
dozen has confidence in the honest administration of law or in 
those who make a profession of politics. Is it possible for 
words to convey a more scathing denunciation of a political 
system than do these facts ? 

The destruction of public confidence in government—I care 
not by what means brought about—is a sure sign of impending 
danger, and it is a matter that every good citizen will seri¬ 
ously consider. 

This general want of confidence in our delegate system, in 
the honesty of politicians and parties, as I have stated on a 
preceeding page, is the natural outgrowth of party perfidy and 
disloyalty through a long term of years. It is not the growth 
of a short time. There is no question that the influence of 
wealth has in some way brought about this deplorable result. 
Be that as it may, pur duty is to right the matter as quickly 
and as thoroughly as possible. 

What is to be done ? Shall we vote to continue the present 
system when there is every indication that a crisis must come 
sooner or later? Why delay, when millions of our number are 
already discouraged, disheartened, hungry and wretched ? 
Haven’t we been in hell long enough ? Shall we wait till the 
bondage of poverty drives from the homes of our workingmen 
the last vestige of hope, and rivets the accursed chains of debt 
upon our children’s children ? 

Vote the change now —it may be too late to-morrow. 

PARTY PREJUDICE A SIGN OF IGNORANCE. 

We know absolutely that nearly all the want, misery and 
wretchedness we see on every hand to-day come from artifi¬ 
cial conditions—not from natural causes, yet we have not the 
courage to say so and vote a change, 


Party Prejudice a Sign of Ignorance. 


4i 


We go moneyless and shabbily dressed, and work long hours, 
see wife and children in want, then vote to keep the money 
power and politicians astride our necks. It seems that we 
prefer to hug and kiss our chains ;—would it not serve us 
right if our children in their honest indignation—robbed of 
proper support and education—would sometimes kick us out, 
chains and all ? 

But do we deserve anything better so long as we remain the 
dupes and serfs of selfish and unreasoning conservatism? Is 
not an empty stomach good enough for any voter who will 
not put aside party prejudice in the consideration of political 
questions ? 

I have respect for every honest and sincere voter of what¬ 
ever party, however much he may differ from me. But for 
any person who will not do his own thinking on all subjects, 
and act on his honest convictions; who will not try to possess 
the inner-most kernel of truth regardless of what may seem 
the most generally accepted theories—for such I have only a 
kind of pity that almost borders on contempt. And what shall 
I say of the voter, in these degenerate political days, who will 
fill up on the pabulum of a single partisan newspaper, and 
try to pass himself off as well posted in politics ? 

I sometimes think the influence exerted by nearly all dis¬ 
tinctive partisan newspapers is so narrow as to be positively 
detrimental to the proper exercise of intelligent citizenship. 
For this reason alone Direct Legislation should be welcomed 
by all good people. The thoroughly partisan newspaper cul¬ 
tivates prejudice and bigotry, and party rancor is a natural re¬ 
sult. If all our newspapers, in both city and country, could 
be honestly independent, could discuss measures untrammeled 
by party interest or domination, as is the case in Switzerland, 
how much Ipetter-infinitely better-it would be for the people. 

Let us not forget that partyism is oftentimes unreasonable 
and actually dangerous. Rome fell through the quarrels of 
the plebeians and the patricians. Wealth in every age and 
country has attempted to divide the people, and keep them 
divided. Greece was riven and shattered by the strife of the 
partisans of Athens and Sparta. Byzantium’s streets ran with 
blood over a conflict between the Greens and the Blues, in¬ 
cited by a jockey contest. Party bickerings and rancor al¬ 
ways detract attention from the important issues in every 
campaign. This is invariably to the advantage of wealth, 


42 


In Hell and the Way Out . 


An unthinking, prejudiced voter is a disgrace to any party. 
There is no security for free government that is not grounded 
upon intelligent suffrage. The money power would never 
have gained such supremacy had all voters as well as all rep¬ 
resentatives been honest and independent. 

Direct Legislation is purely an unpartisan issue. It ap¬ 
peals to all voters who are more interested in good govern¬ 
ment than in mere party success. It furnishes the true test 
of intelligent, honest, unprejudiced citizenship. 

The Colonial congress of 1774 resolved that “ The foun¬ 
dation of all free government is the right in the people to 
participate in their legislative council.” Do they in truth do 
so now ?—since when ? 

LET US NOT DECEIVE OURSELVES. 

“ A government by the people,” says a writer in The Com¬ 
ing Nation , “ is a dream yet to be realized. Instead of being 
democratically governed we are under the domination of 
political bureaucracies that plunder and rob the people. Job¬ 
bers in politics through deceiving the people, have procured 
an increasing centralization of political power which is being 
used for the material profit of privileged classes. Not cen¬ 
tralization, but diffusion of power is the safety of the present.” 

Unfortunately politicians are not honest, at the most but 
few of them, and the few exceptions prove the rule. They 
care more for their own interests than for the interests of the 
people. So they will naturally oppose “ direct rule by the 
people.” 

Webster once said of the professional politician: “He is 
primarily devoted to his own advancement in public office; a 
schemer, an intriguer—cunning, politic and artful.” If it 
were possible to adopt a political system that would transform 
the politician into a mere committeeman would such a change 
be a public calamity—it probably would be in the eyes of the 
politician. 

Have we not seen enough of a system that depends entirely 
for its efficiency on the honesty and ability of the politician ? 

Now a word in regard to political parties—simply to pander 
to the taste of some of our party-worshipers : John Clark 
Ridpath, the world-known author of school histories, and who 
is neither a partisan nor politician, lias written thes^ facts ; 


Is Political Reform Necessary ? 


43 


“ Our political parties differ from one another only in the 
degree of their subserviency to the money power. It always 
comes to this in «the last stage of partisan degradation. Our 
political parties to-day fawn around the money power just as 
they fawned around the knees of the slave oligarchy in the 
anti-bellum days.” 

Has history recorded one instance of the abuse of power 
vested in the people? On the other hand, has not every rev^- 
olution sprung from the centralization of wealth and power 
in the hands of a few ? Why should we hesitate to vote to 
change a system that is certainly working to perfection in this 
dangerous trend ? 

IS POLITICAL REFORM NECESSARY? 

The people are coming more and more to realize the vast 
difference between a representative democracy and a social 
democracy. 

The United States has enjoyed the proud distinction of being 
the pattern in self-government for nearly all other nations. 
But the Republic of Switzerland has far out-stripped us in 
applied political science. We are no longer an example of 
direct democracy. Political equality with us is a mere figure 
of speech. Our much vaunted representative system belies 
its very name—it does not represent. 

Prof. George D. Harron, of Iowa College, says in his new 
book, “The Christian State” : “ We do not select the repre¬ 
sentatives we elect; We do not make our laws ; we do not 
govern ourselves. Our political parties are controlled by 
private, close corporations that exist as parasites upon the 
body politic, giving us the most corrupting and humiliating 
despotisms in political history. Our legislation is determined 
by a vast system of lobby. The people know that our legisla¬ 
tive methods have become the organization of indirect bribery 
and corruption. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the 
chief work of both state and national legislatures in recent 
years has been to obstruct, defeat or cheat the will of the 
people.” 

The money power—not the people dominates legislation. 
To be more explicit I cite the following facts, nearly all bear¬ 
ing on the record of recent legislation, as evidence : 


44 


In Hell and the Way Out. 


i The striking down of one-half of our metal money 
since 1870, thus crushing the debtor class, doing much to 
bring about the present business paralysis, and giving the cred¬ 
itor class the advantage of a dearer money. Nearly all fixed 
charges, such as taxes, interest, salaries of officials, railroad 
rates, the great debts, etc., remain the t same while labor and 
its products have been purposely depressed. The money power 
alone profited by this legislation, so must be held responsible 
for it;—no other class could have had any such interest in it. 

2 The professional lobby now regularly employed by cor¬ 
porations at every session of congress and in the various state 
legislatures. 

3 Continued exemption of the rich from paying their just 
proportion of taxes. 

4 The debauching of courts and public officials, as evi¬ 
denced by the income tax decision, and the manipulation of 
public funds by banking syndicates and “experts,” as shown 
by the recent bond issues where millions were made in, profits. 

5 The substitution of “government by injunction,” for 
government by the constitution and laws—for the purpose of 
maintaining property rights above human rights. 

6 The striking down of “trial by jury/’ as in the Debs 
case,-another effort to make property rights superior to human 
rights. 

7 A subsidized press in almost every important city, as 
well as a subsidized news service in the interest of capital and 
plutocracy. This explains why congress has not—and will not 
take any action toward the establishment of postal telegraphs 
and telephones such as other nations enjoy. 

8 The persistent refusal of congress to take control of the 
Union Pacific railroad in the interest of the people when they 
are practically its owners. 

9 The donation by congress of sufficient public lands and 
guaranteed railroad bonds to build and equip all necessary 
railroads in the country ; repeated concessions to banking in¬ 
terests ; the various so-called refunding acts, which have each 
time so changed the terms that a perpetual bonded debt is at 
last saddled on the people ; the British gold-standard system 
of finance which has so lowered values that our national debt 
to-day is actually as great as it was thirty years ago, although 


A Serious Indictment . 


45 


about 1600 millions have been paid on principal and interest; 
the enormous sums squandered on so-called river and harbor 
improvement; the 80 millions recently appropriated for “ coast 
defenses” when the present government revenues are insuffi¬ 
cient for current expenses ; the persistent refusal of congress 
to establish postal savings banks in the face of an almost uni¬ 
versal demand for them 

10 The various scandals in which senators, congressmen 
and other officials including the president, have been charged 
with boodle transactions in deals with the Sugar trust, mail 
contracts, Chicago Gas stock, bond syndicates, etc. 

11 Corporation attorneys, like senators Thurston, Vilas, 
Hill and others, being allowed to hold public and corporate 
positions at the same time. 

12 The encouragement by congress ot the militia, and 
the effort to keep stationed large detachments of regulars near 
the manufacturing centers—making it manifest that any move¬ 
ment against plutocratic spoliation will be instantly crushed. 

13 The fact that the political bosses go to the Whitneys, 
Rockefellers, Havemeyers and Pullmans for their heavy cor¬ 
ruption campaign funds is certainly presumptive evidence that 
the old parties are mortgaged to wealth from the beginning. 
(Vide Senator Chandler’s charges against Mark Hanna.) 

14 Repeal of laws in the various legislatures in the inter¬ 
est of wealth, which regulated the employment of child and 
female labor. Note also tfie recent increase in the salaries of 
United States marshals to $4,500 a year—mote than the aver¬ 
age pay of governors. 

15 The investigation ordered by the 48th congress of the 
enormous defalcations under the Grant administrations shows 
that more than 17 million dollars were stolen between 1869 
and 1883, and only a quarter of a million was recovered. This 
occurred in the signal service and disbursing office of the 
state department alone. In 1876 Senator Davis, of W. Vir¬ 
ginia, got a committee appointed to investigate the condition 
of the treasury. Through the testimony laid before this com- 
mitee, together with the examination of the ledgers of the 
department, it was shown that 2,527 erasures and alterations 
had been made, and that $247,768,341 had been stolen, or 
was wholly unaccounted for. 


46 


The Only Way Out. 


17 There has been little or no legislation for the past 
twenty years or more in the interest of the people, but nearly 
all has been in the interest of wealth in some form or other. 

Do not present conditions fully attest the truth of every 
indictment in this long bill of charges—a bill that could easily 
be extended many times its present length? After reading these 
specifications of disloyalty to the people—these indictments of 
perfidy and dishonor—what shall be our answer to the ques¬ 
tion, “ Is political reform necessary ? 

THE NEW TYRANNY IN GOVERNMENT. 

“The new tyranny in government,” says Henry D. Lloyd, 
“isnot so stupid or clumsy as to pass laws against free speech 
or trial by jury or the right of meeting. But it sends its 
police to break up meetings of workingmen, and its judges 
kill free speech by deciding that a speaker is responsible for 
the bad use a fool or a knave may make of his utterences. 

“Our administration of law in parallel columns forbids the 
combination of workingmen and permits the combination of 
employers. This awkward construction needs not appear in 
our statute books. It is created by the subtle and more irre¬ 
sistible legislation of judges and attorney-generals. * * * 

The middle classes of America, who are now helping a few 
thousand plutocrats to take away the working people’s rights 
are establishing the mischievous precedent by which when the 
time comes their own rights will be forfeited.” 

The necessity for reform the reader must see is not con¬ 
fined to any one branch or department of our present system ; 
the people are not only permitting the sacrifice of their finan¬ 
cial interests, by losing control in their governmental affairs, 
but even their liberties, as Mr. Lloyd plainly shows, are in im¬ 
minent danger. Poverty means degredation and servitude; but 
to lose liberty is to lose all. 

The thing to do first is to get the government back into 
the hands of the people. After this important step it will 
be no difficult task to restore the common rights of every 
citizen. Then we would enjoy the advantages of a true de¬ 
mocracy, and the money power would become respectable. 

A vote for the present system means a vote to perpetuate 
the rule of the money power. Do you realize its significance? 


A Comparison of Governments. 


47 


When we are told that “all free governments derive their 
just powers from the consent of the goverened,” and are then 
informed that we cannot have the privilege of registering a 
“ no ” or “ yes” on the laws that are to govern us, it is like seat¬ 
ing a person at a banquet table in his own house and denying 
him the right to eat. 

A BRIEF COMPARISON OF GOVERNMENTS. 

It is claimed on the authority of Prof. Copeland and others 
that England possesses a much more thoroughly honest and 
representative government to-day than we do in this country. 

There, a political campaign seldom lasts more than six 
weeks—generally much less. Ours lasts about six months. 
In England the new parliament begins its work soon after 
election, while France and Germany are about as prompt. 
Even after our long campaigns our new congress does not con¬ 
vene for thirteen months after election ;—no other nation is 
so slow in its political action. 

When congress does convene does it carry out the popular 
will ? When has it done so ? Then again, there is more wealth 
in our “ house of lords” than in the aristocratic branch of the 
English parliament, and the influence of this vast wealth on 
legislation has come to be a generally acknowledged fact. 

Our president holds the veto power over congress. The 
crown of England would not presume to exercise such a dic¬ 
tatorial power over parliament, and has not done so during the 
past century. Then behind congress and the president stands 
an irresponsible supreme court, appointed by executives (not 
by the people) for life, ready whenever the money power re¬ 
quires it to declare'the people’s demands unconstutional, as 
in the income tax decision. 

England has only 32 judges, or one for every 940,000 of 
population. Illinois, with a population of only 4,000,000, has 
178 judges, or one for every 22,472 of population. Every 
state is similarly burdened with the “judge curse.” 

Our politicians and party leaders have a great deal to say 
about our superior advantages under “free government” when 
even semi-barbarous Russia can give us pointers, and her gov¬ 
ernment-controlled railroads and telegraphs are a success, and 
are conducted in the interest of the people—not corporations, 


4 8 


The Only Way Out. 


and with a much lower rates than we pay. But the same may 
be said of all nations of consequence outside of North Amer¬ 
ica except Turkey, Spain and England, and England’s control 
of her railroads is so severe as to amount to almost confisca¬ 
tion. There are 43 cities in Great Britain that control their 
own franchises, and only one or so in this country. England has 
for many years enjoyed the advantages of postal savings 
banks and postal telegraphs and telephones. But these are 
common almost everywhere away from home—if it was not for 
the money power they would be common here. 

ANOTHER SIDE TO THE MATTER. 

But is it fair to institute a comparison between a young re¬ 
public like this and old, impoverished nations? For example : 
the claim is made that our people are more prosperous than 
those of other nations. Look at the facts a moment : Great 
Britain comprises 121,150 square miles—a little more than 
double the area of Illinois, and has 39,000,000 population, or 
more than 322 to the square mile, while we have only 20. 
Only six per cent, of our resources are developed while Eng¬ 
land’s are approaching the point of exhaustion. Holland has 
more than 500 to the square mile and Sweden has more than 
twelve times our number to the square mile. These figures 
are given merely as expressing the condition of nearly all the 
countries of the old world. Yet in the face of these facts, and 
with abundant harvests in the United States more than 200,- 
000 working people have left our shores for these impover¬ 
ished, crowded, monarchial countries across the sea during 
the past two years to better their conditon. 

Could any comment be more suggestive of the utter lack of 
wisdom and sound policy on the part of our dominant polit¬ 
ical parties than this fact ? When a political system in a re¬ 
public becomes so intolerable as to drive 200,000 people out 
of the country—and into such a hell as the old world offers— 
isn’t it about time that all good people were striving for a 
change ? If natural conditions were anything as bad as our 
political conditions are what would become of the people ? 

Here is another phase of the question : Our population 
doubles every twenty-five years. If two million of our peo¬ 
ple are now seeking in vain for employment, what is almost 
X certain to be the situation ten years hence when our population 
exceeds 100 million ? Will any thoughtful person contend 


Postal Savings Banks. 


49 


that the present policy of our dominant parties would meet 
the requirements of such a population when so many of our 
present sparce population are now living as Florence Kelley 
has said, “in a perpetual hell in which the conditions are 
becoming more and more intolerable ? ” 

Why not exercise the same judgment in political matters 
that we do in other matters—discard that which has proved 
inefficient and adopt that which has given best results in the 
experiment of free government ? 

Wendell Phillips said : “ Responsibility educates.” Direct 

Legislation would increase interest in better government. 

POSTAL SAVINGS BANKS. 

In England these institutions were established in 1861 ; in 
Canada in 1868 ; in Austria-Hungary in 1883 ; they have also 
been established in France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, 
Germany, Italy, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, India, Ceylon, 
Finland, Japan, Argentina, Australia, New Zeland, Hawaii and 
Trinidad. Postal savings banks have been adopted by almost 
every civilized nation in the world except the United States. 

Why should we not have them? Dr. C. F. Taylor states in 
The Medical World that he has corresponded with a large 
number of congressmen on the subject, and in reply to this 
question, W. W. Bower, member of congress from San Diego, 
Calif., sent a copy of his “ Postal Savings Bill, ’’which has been 
pending in congress for years, and writes: “Bankers and 
money sharks do not want any postal saving system. That is 
the answer to your ‘ why not ? ’ ” 

Every political party of any importance in the present cam¬ 
paign, except the republican party, has declared in favor of 
postal savings banks. Has the money power a better hold on 
this party than on the others? Has it come to the point that 
we cannot secure the advantages that other nations enjoy ? 
Reader, how does this suit you ? Isn’t it about time we were 
adopting Direct Legislation, direct common sense or some¬ 
thing else ? 

It is well known that these institutions encourage small 
savings, and a citizen with a bank account (unless unreason¬ 
ably large) is usually a better, steadier and a mure patriotic 
citizen than one without a bank account. With Direct Legis¬ 
lation the question of postal savings banks could be settled 


5o 


The Only Way Oat. 


at any election on national issues, also the question of public 
ownership of telegraphs and telephones, and their being 
made part of our postal system, as they are in England, Switzer¬ 
land, and in many other countries. 

The money power will continue in control of these matters 
so long as the people are denied the right of self rule. 

SECTIONALISM AND THE PRESENT SYSTEM. 

The slave power was responsible for the so-called u Mason 
and Dixon’s line”—for the long continued hatred between the 
North and the South. Shall the money power be permitted 
to rend the East and West in a similar manner ? 

In thousands of pamphlets, newspapers and books the West 
is to-day asserting itself to be pronged and robbed by the 
East, and a feeling of bitter hatred and enmity for New Eng¬ 
land has arisen beyond the Mississippi. Millions of western 
people are beginning to inquire why all this distress when 
there has been no famine ; why the producers of wealth are 
homeless and moneyless while those who produce no wealth 
dissipate in measureless luxury ? They read in the govern¬ 
ment statistical reports of 1890 that Massachusetts alone 
gained more w r ealth from 1880 to 1890 than Indiana, Illinois, 
Iowa, Nebraska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia 
and North Cariolina that contain' seven times the popula¬ 
tion and fifty-eight times the territory. They well know 
that unjust, money-controlled legislation is responsible for 
this outragious condition. 

It is reported that in some parts of the West it is almost un¬ 
safe to say you are from Massachusetts. Commercial travelers 
claim that many Western merchants will not even look at 
eastern goods. Some even claim that the thirteen colonies 
have become financially annexed to England, and that noth¬ 
ing now remains of the American people but the western 
states. 

These are Herbert N. Casson’s words : “ What England is 

to Ireland, what Spain is to Cuba, the East is to the West. 
Massachusetts has become the American Gypsy-moth, feeding 
on the fruitage of the West.” 

In 1889 the farm mortgages of the West amounted to al¬ 
most $3,500,000,000, and during the last thirteen years in 
Minnesota alone 33,453 farmers were sold out. These farmers 


Trade Unions cjd a Direct Vote . 


51 


raised good crops,but were obliged year after year to sell be¬ 
low cost of production—pojftoes 83 cents a ton, and grain 
correspondingly low. The srinkage of values caused by an 
insufficient and shrinking m i}ey volume has well nigh bank 


rupted the West. Is it any jit 
that the money power has but 
“ There’s nothing to arbitrate, 


rnder the western people claim 
wo planks in its gold platform: 
and “The public be damned.” 


Let us not commit the side blunder in this case we did 
with the slave power. For toe/sake of the union—for the sake 
of national honor—these conditions must be righted. How 
is it to be done under a sy^em that sees no injustice in all the 
law-made inequalities oj/he present—a system that defends 
every form of corporat/g re ed, tyranny and oppression ? 

TRADE UNl<W AND DIRECT LEGISLATION. 

The history of the trade-union movement in the United 
Stales is similar to th^ of Great Britain in many respects. In 
a political sense it hadbeen a decided failure. 

With a membership \f about 1,000,000, according to the es¬ 
timate kindly furnishet me 'by August McCraith, the labor- 
union vote of the Unit® States is thrown in such a way that 
no more notice is takenVf it by politicians and political par¬ 
ties than any equal nunW of unorganized voters. This im¬ 
mense vote, like the farny vote, is frittered away year after 
year as far as securing an\ practical benefits for workingmen 
is concerned. It has not A much as a single representative 
in congress or in any of ttyeyarious state legislatures. 

If the trade union y/teyoulc. unite in adopting Direct 
Legislation it could aXd vroylck be speedily adopted. Then 
what a change coffin and would be made in this political 
“comedy of errors/ \ 

John Burns/’ffii acknowledged Wde* of the English trade- 
union move-*fe nt > has given his vieVs in the. following words— 
and we /^America might do weJ tcWofit by them : 

“Xave our labor unions repaii the expenditure of labor 
and money it has cost to maintain them ? The political ben¬ 
efits have been little or nothim where we should have re¬ 
ceived our greatest returns. K he benefits we have derived 
from organization have beenjf maintaining a living shale of 
wages, and in reality this ij/about all we have gained. It 
seems next to impossible forfls to secure a united vote in the 




52 


The Oni Way Out „ 


interest of labor on account of iictions and parties. If every 
British trade unionist would advocate Direct Legislation— 
would unite on this one refdrm,which in my judgment is the 
most important political reforn at this time,—I believe we 
could accomplish more for theqmse of labor in one year than 
we have accomplished during past forty years.” 

Let me ask these questions of Very trade unionist who reads 
these words : Is there any other ikue on earth that gives any 
promise of uniting the organized labor vote of the country? 
Is there any other issue that 'wo/ld be half as servicable or 
permanent in its benefits to the em Se of labor ? Then why 
not be wise enough to drop all difn r ences, and unite on this 
bed-rock reform? 

Direct Legislation is by all odds th» quickest, best and most 
direct route out of our industrial hell will you take it ? 

HOW THIS REFORM WOULD HELP FARMERS. 

In many ways Direct Legislation ^ould be of inestimable 
advantage to our great body of farmes now numbering about 
34 millions,—many times the largest >f our industrial classes. 

As a body farmers have never ha^ anything like just and 
fair representation in any of our lw-making bodies. The 
fact is lawyers have enjoyed a mor>p°ly in law-making to the 
disadvantage of all classes except themselves and the money 
power. It is said there are to-dy 230 lawyers in congress. 
May not this be the explanation^ the fact that the people’s 
interests in matters of legiskrt^n have been so outragiously 
neglected? / / t 

The Supreme Judged the R/pub.j c of Switzerland is a 
farmer. He was installed in Office hr the people for the 
reason that he is considered /n honest -.-qan of good judg¬ 
ment, and the Swiss^^d ^ e r. purification'; to be of more 
importance in thp^ward ci justice than mere technical ability. 

The Swis^ethod of dwt vote would insure our farmers 
fair representation,—woTd^ive them the opportunity rep . 
resent th/mselves., “ Ldwye.-made laws” would then be quoted 
at a discount. Under this ystem agriculture would not be 
likely p remain at the bottoi round of the industrial ladder. 
The farmers have been trying government by the politicians 
—how does it suit? Why hoItry Direct Legislation? 


53 


Necessity for Uuied Action. 

The question of Direct Legislation is of vastly more im¬ 
portance than the slavery question was. The rights and liber¬ 
ties of only four million people were involved in the slavery 
controversy while the rights and liberties of more than 65 
million people will be favorably effected by this reform. 

\ / 

EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON UNITED ACTION. 

tf all the elements opposed ;o the domination of plutocracy 
would unite the “ rule of the people” could be secured before 
the >^ose of 1896. 

It se^ms that there are thousands of voters who do not fully 
understated that Direct Legis/ation is an issue in this cam¬ 
paign. F^r some reason the/party newspapers have systemat¬ 
ically ignored the issue, and/will no doubt continue to do so, 
until the people educate the newspapers to the importance of 
the reform. Most all reliable and pains-taking newspapers 
would undoubtedly be benefited by the adoption of this re¬ 
form—it would awaken increased interest in public affairs, 
and the papers would receive the first and greatest benefits 
resulting from such an educational change. The newspapers 

CANNOT AFFORD TO DISREGARD PUBLIC INTEREST IN THIS 

matter. If they do they will certainly be accused of merce¬ 
nary motives in any effort to deprive the people of self-rule. 

To keep the people divided seems to have been the studied 
policy of the money power in all ages and in all countries. 
“Divide and conquer” has invariably been the slogan of 
wealth. A fine illustration of this fact is afforded by the Eng¬ 
lish aristocracy in its treatment of Ireland. It has encouraged 
divisions simply for convenience of robbery and extortion, 
and generally on religion. When the catholics are pulling 
the ears of the protestants the landlords and officials are in¬ 
dustriously picking the pockets of both. In this country the 
tariff question has well served a similar purpose. 

Now the question that should interest all patriotic voters is 
what change can be adopted that will insure popular rule in 
Diace of the present rule of money? Otherwise how can we 
reasonably expect better conditions? Will the thousands who 
now feel the heavy hand of organized greed quietly submit 
much longer to injustice for the sake of peace ? 

Is there any other issue but “the rule of the people” that 

/ 



54 


, •: c ■ >■ f ' ■ mm 

The (nly Way Out . 

could possibly unite the support of the single-taxer, the pro¬ 
hibitionist, the socialist and philosophical anarchist? If free 
silver is adopted it will at Aost be but a palliative measure. 
We must possess the means fX securing other and better reforms. 
Then why should not every \ditor, speaker and writer advo¬ 
cate Direct Legislation as toe issue from this time forth 7 
This issue includes every othJr. 

Our rights and liberties are ^gradually being abridged, not 
only by the money power, butulso by other influences. Do 
you doubt it ? Then read carefully the “ Loud Postal bill,” 
an infamous measure recently reported and recommenced for 
passage by the committee on postoffices.. It provides that 
certain corporations shall have their tetters carried at a re¬ 
duced rate by using stamping machines placed in business 
houses ; and postmasters at delivery offices are io keep a re¬ 
cord of all these letters, report them to the department, and 
the government collect the postage from each corporation, 
LESS A CERTAIN DISCOUNT. I 

It will be seen at once that this would open thi way for any 
amount of fraud, as the honesty of postmaste/s in reporting 
the correct number of letters might be influenced by friend¬ 
ship or money. It gives the big concerns a reduced postage 
rate which of itself is bad enough, but by no'means the most 
objectionable and dangerous provision of the bill which lies 
in the fact that a large amount of newspapers and periodicals 
will be shut out of the mails by giving the delivery postmaster 
a censorship over publications, and he can deliver them or not 
at his pleasure. (This is a feature of the Russian postal sys¬ 
tem.) Other dangerous provisions of this bill are omitted for 
want of space. 


I desire also to call attention of the reader, especially if he 
is an editor or publisher, to a bill introduced by Senator Vilas 
last December, which has been read twice and referred to the 
committee on judiciary, and which provides a penalty of 
$5,000, or imprisonment for five years, or both, for sending any 
book, pamphlet, paper, ljetter or print through the express 
companies, or by any common carrier, which shall not meet 
the approval of self-appointed censors of the Anthony Com¬ 
stock type. Congressman D. B. Henderson’s bill, which is sub¬ 
stantially an amendment to the so-called Comstock postal law, 
is another infamous measure of the same character. 



Some Objections Answered. 


55 


These bills, and scores of others that might be mentioned, 
clearly show the drift of legislation. They are all assaults on 
individual and natural rights, in favor of bigotry—in favor of 
“the patent moralist.” They infringe upon personal liberty, 
and are besides a flagrant invasion of the sacred privacy of 
the home. Any person who will even pretend to represent the 
people, and accept a salary for such service, and will then be 
contemptible enough to propose such laws, ought to be im¬ 
prisoned at hard labor for life. A member of congress, or any 
other person, who would make it unlawful to mail such pub¬ 
lications as Anna Besant’s “■ Law of Population, or Dr. E. B. 
Footers “Medical Essays,” and other similar works, is not 
only a traitor to free government, free speech and free press, 
but is also an enemy of the race. 

Russian methods are certainly being engrafted into our pres¬ 
ent system, and a remedy must be applied. The friends of 
freedom of publication cannot act too quickly or too wisely. 
If the abridgement of liberty in this direction continues the 
dominant party will ultimately tolerate no criticism of its ad¬ 
ministration of government.—Recent “contempt of court” 
proceedings point unmistakably to this result. 

Are we ready for a Russian censor in every village post- 
office ?—But this is one of the provisions of the “Loud Postal 
bill,” which has been recommended for passage by the com¬ 
mittee on postoffices. What can more certainly avert such a 
calamity than Direct Legislation ? In many of its forms such 
a calamity is already upon us. 

Without the freedom of speech and press no people can be 
free or government secure. So why should we not look with 
alarm upon every assault on natural and individual rights? 

SOME OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

The stock argument against Direct Legislation is that it 
would be impracticable in so large a country as this while it 
might be successful in a small republic like Switzerland. 

I answer, that we have adopted fifteen amendments to our 
national constitution by the Referendum principle—if we can 
vote as a nation on issues of this kind—why can we not vote 
on ail national issues of importance ? 

In Switzerland only a small percentage of the measures 
adopted by their Federal Assembly are referred to the people, 


UfC. 


56 


The Only Way Out. 


But the fact that the people have the power to demand the 
Referendum when they choose exerts a salutary influence over 
the law-making body, which is plainly noticeable to-day in 
the conditions that prevail throughout that model republic. 
That we stand in need of such an influence in this country 
cannot truthfully be denied. 

There is nothing impracticable about Direct Legislation for 
this or any other country. In state, county and municipal 
affairs it has come to be even as great a necessity. 

THE MONEY QUESTION. 

Some one has said: “The American people must learn the 
lesson of money, or they are lost.” Our space allows of only 
a thought or two on this subject. After the interminable dis¬ 
cussions for so many months through this campaign on the 
questions of “ratios,” “ standard of values,” “primary” and 
“redemption money,” “international bimetalism,” etc., etc., 
the reader will find that the money question will not be settlea 
until settled by Direct Legislation. The silver vote will be 
counted out in some way, even if in the majority. The money 
power may be depended on to go to any extreme to further 
its interests. 

The tariff question is also as far from settlement to-day as 
it was twenty years ago—this is another issue that must be 
settled directly by the people through the Referendum—if 
ever settled. The politicians and those with self-interests, 
have furnished the evidence .that they are neither fit nor able 
to settle this issue. 

Under the first administration of President Lincoln 60 mil¬ 
lion dollars were issued in demand treasury notes, and made 
legal tender for all debts, public and private—equal to coin. 
This' 70 as the most perfect money ever known to civilization .— 
“ the Abraham Lincoln greenbacks.” They could not be cor¬ 
nered and speculated in ; they bore no interest, were good in 
every state for their full face value, and were as “sound ” as 
the United States government, because backed by the billions 
of property of all the people. 

But in an evil hour congress-influenced by the money power 
—demonetized these greenbacks by allowing the concession 
known as the exception clause—“ except duties on imports and 
interest on the public debt.” This at once gave the owners of 


The Tariff Question . 


57 


gold a monopoly, and they have well maintained that monop¬ 
oly ever since. The history of our financial legislation shows 
numbers of concessions made to the money power similar to 
this one, and which have resulted in the loss of untold millions 
to the people. It is the same old, robber gold ring to-day. 

As long as we use money with so-called intrinsic value (ex¬ 
cept perhaps for subsidiary coin,) there will be trouble. It will 
fluctuate ; it will be hoarded, monopolized and held out of 
circulation in a thousand different ways—either silver or gold. 
That money should have intrinsic value is simply a supersti¬ 
tion, and defeats the object for which money is intended. It 
also works to the decided advantage of money monopoly. 
“Any power able to control our volume of money,” said Gar¬ 
field, “is able to control all business transactions.” 

There is no longer any question that it would be greatly 
to the advantage of the people if both gold and silver could 
be demonetized in the interest of a sufficient issue of United 
States treasury notes to abundantly transact the business of the 
country. But if the money power will not allow the people to 
put out such an issue of national treasury notes, then the next 
best thing is the use of both silver and gold as primary or re¬ 
demption money. Gold monometalism certainly cannot be in 
the interest of any but the creditor class, and only the money 
speculators and mortgage sharks of this class would be ma¬ 
terially benefitted. “ This country has never been prosperous 
under the gold standard,” says the Chicago Record , and yet the 
money power has been able to mislead many good and intel¬ 
ligent men on this question. 

The Chicago Tribune admits that it is possible for a few 
bankers to corner the present gold supply. If this statement 
from this gold-standard paper is true it ought to be sufficient 
reason for bimetalism if no other reason could be given. 

If the maintenance of our British gold standard could be 
voted on directly by the people independent of party environ¬ 
ment who doubts a large majority would not be against it T 

Is it not a little strange that nearly all who live off the/ted 
of others—those who corrupt legislation and thrive by /very 
questionable methods—are striving for the gold standar^ ? 

THE TARIFF ISSUE. j 

Every voter whose eyes are so full of tariff sand tia/he can 
see no other issue should bear in mind that with IcKfiley’s 


53 


The Only Way Out. 


election there is scarcely a possibility of any increase in the 
present tariff for at least two years, or until the present polit¬ 
ical status of the Senate is changed. The coming election will 
not affect the present Senate, which is opposed to any increase 
in tariff duties. This situation furnishes another object lesson 
of the perfection (?) of the present system. Think of a polit¬ 
ical system that affords no opportunity for two years or more 
to correct the tariff blunders the politicians have made ! 


RELIGION AND PRESENT CONDITIONS. 


Thousands in our churches have hardly thought it worth 
while to consider the influence exerted by present conditions 
on the growth of Christian teaching. Supposed self-interest, 
in many cases, stands in the way of any such inquiry. 

The church stands to-day unmistakably on the side of the 
capitalist class,” and this classs is a very small minority. This 
policy, whether right or wrong, has resulted in estranging 
from the church practically the great laboring masses, especi¬ 
ally in cities. Church statistics in Chicago, New York city 
and even in Indianapolis show that less than 15 per centage 
of the population attend church, and this per centage is de¬ 
creasing. • 

When we consider that more than half of our population 
is urban, and taking these three cities as a basis, the religious 
outlook is on a par with the present political situation. It 
will not be disputed that the ranks of organized labor—with 
their million membership—have been decidedly outspoken in 
their charges not only of a venal press, but a venal, cowardly 
pulpit as well. Does it not appear from this survey that some 
radical change must be made ? 


The census reports relating to the increase of crime in the 
'United States show that in 1850 there was one criminal in every 
1,448 of population, while in 1890 there was one in every 757 
\f the population. The Chicago Tribune states that crime in 
licago—under the Swift-republican administration—has in¬ 
creased 15 per cent, over that of 1895, and 34 percent, over 
th\t of 1894. The reader will hardly question the Tribune’s 


uneints;—as a gold-standard paper it makes a specialty of 
iga\l information as to the practical working of the British 
gold\stanCtrd. This rapid increase of crime is at least sug- 
gesti\c if Vir churches—as well as most of the big daily news¬ 
paper Y-ar\ no t truckling entirely too much to the money 
power \o be\f any great service to the masses. 




How About Religion? V i>y 

Any industrial or economic system—ttlthoA defended by 
the church—that allows a few to begg^ and starve the 
many, that defends monopoly control oflsuy natural product 
or necessity of life, should be despise/lby all. Did Christ 
favor any such plan ? To say that he dicjwould be to offer an 
insult to his life-long ministry. Christ h /4 no message for the 
rich, yet wealth dominates the churchAo\day. May this not 
be the reason why so many believe tha/of t\ie two institutions, 
politics and religion, the latter needs /eformqig most ? 

Can the interests of religion be t^st conserved by the few 
or the many? Can the church maintain itself if present con¬ 
ditions continue ; and if our political system continues how 
can we reasonably expect improvement ? If you believe in God 
and the people more than y/u do in politicians and political 
parties, why not vote tha/way— vote as you pray? 

ft * * * 

“ I believe in the capacity of the American people for self- 
government. I have be/ieved at all times that power could 
safely be intrusted with the people. This was the doctrine 
of Washington, of Jefferson, of Lincoln. And no other polit¬ 
ical system is so admirably adapted to secure this result as 
the Swiss method of Direct Legislation.”— From a speech by 
Hon . Wm. J. Bryan , delivered in Omaha , September , iSpy. 

^ 

“ Representative law-making is costly and oftentimes very 
unsatisfactory. It is well known that public interests suffer 
because representatives abuse their power. A “direct vote” 
would remedy all this, and we must come to it sooner or later.” 
— Gov. John P. A/tgeld. 

* * * * 

“ It is a question in my mind whether any voter is a good 
citizen who opposes the ‘ rule of the people.’ "—Mayor Hazen 
S. Pingree. 

* * * * 

Present conditions are a libel upon civilization ; a slander 
on every school, college and university the world over. 

If there is one law supreme in hell it must be the law of 
capitalism as applied to-day. 

Must the effort of all who love justice, truth and right con¬ 
tinue powerless to stay the ever increasing avalanche of human 
want and suffering? Is fraternity a myth and kindly feeling 
a sign of failing business tact ? 


THE PRES:NT DUTY OF YOUNG MEw. 


“ THE AGE IS WEARY W CAMP FOLLOWERS, WEARY OF SER¬ 
VILITY, WEARy\o>F CRINGED necks and knees 
BENT TO CORRUPTION.” 

The old Greek said, ‘ kno\V thyself.” But the admon¬ 
ition of the best and wises; of all ages has been, “be thyself.” 

The urgent need of the Cay isunselfish men of courage and 
conviction.—Men who dare fa/e\lepraved public opinion, and 
who will not bow at the shrine of a money-god.—Men intel¬ 
ligent and patriotic enough to protest against the growing 
power and corrupting influence of excessive wealth. 

“ No structure of government,” said Lincoln, “can endure 
unless founded upon justice. There must be one law for all, 
and equality under tflat law. The slave power must not be 
resurrected in a more oppressive and tyrannizing money 
power.” 

Young men too often fail to realize the necessity for polit¬ 
ical reform. The intrigues and machinations of corrupt and 
servile men have not yet warped their honest aims nor be¬ 
dimmed their ardent dreams of a noble future. They too often 
overlook the facts in history which ought to serve as sema¬ 
phores for the guidance of republics. 

If it is true that opinions practically become fixed at fifty 
year of age, then it is evident that the hope and security of 
free government lies with the intelligent, unprejudiced vote of 
all young men who prize patriotism more than partyism. 

In the foregoing pages I have endeavored, in my poor way, 
to show the necessity for such political action at this time as 
will restore the ancient rights of government. I sincerely be¬ 
lieve that this change must be made if we are to continue as 
a free people ;—in fact we are far from being a free people 
now, and every day that such action is deferred only aggra¬ 
vates and imperils the situation. The money power has al¬ 
ready involved us in panic, ruin and suffering beyond descrip¬ 
tion of human language. To say the situation is not fraught 
with danger is to say the abolition of slavery did not at one 
time imperil the national Union. 


The Present Duty of Young Men . 


v 4 X 


Is there necessity, justification or apology for present con¬ 
ditions? Is there any justice or fairness in the right of prk 
vate monopoly of any natural product o^ necessity of life) \ 
Why should not the public transact the public business ? Will 
should almost every industry be controlled by monopolies ant 
combines ? Why should there be any such thing as a mone 1 
monopoly in a republic where the people are supposed to havi 
the right of self-rule? The money power has been allowed tp 
hold undisputed sway so long that the nation is at last begin¬ 
ning to feel the force of its soulless grasp. 

Myron Haynes, of Chicago, recently addressed these wo/ds 
to a gathering of old Soldiers : 

“ It is more rare to find men loyal to the best intesests o: 
the country in the calm, cool eventide of peace than in tie 
hot noonday of war. In time of peace the men who stand for 
patriotism are often sneered at, maligned and accursed ; while 
in time of war heroes are applauded and patriots loved. 

“ This country is in greater danger to-day than it wcs in 
1861. Why? Because our foes are not drawn up behind 
forts or arrayed in companies, regiments and platoons. They 
are not openly assailing the flag. In the guize of respectable 
citizens men are undermining the institutions which alone can 
perpetuate our liberties, and are sapping the manhood which 
furnishes the only true material for freeman. * * Rather 

than forfeit our glorious heritage by our indifference and 
cowardice at this time it w^repetter that the Union should 
have gone down amid the confusion of civil strife. 

“ I look to you, peaceful citizens, for a sublimer manifesta¬ 
tion of courage than that for which we applauded you as 
soldiers. You saved your county once ; you love it now. 
Then be true to her interests in the "present emergency.” 

Let me state a fact in closing which the paid ability of the 
world cannot explain away: In the year 1840, according to 
government statistics, labor’s share was 60 per cent, of all 
that was produced that year, and capital’s share was 40 per 
cent. In 1890 labor’s share was 17 per cent., and capital’s 
share 83 per cent. Now, if we estimate that the capitalist 
class in 1890 comprised about four millions and the laboring 
class not less than 62 millions, these statistics at once furnish 
the proof why there is less and less prosperity among the 
masses from year to year. When we come to divide 17 per 
cent, of the annual product, say for 1895, among at least 65 



The Only Way Out . 


million people—the laboring class—we see at once that it is 
not sufficeint to decently feed, clothe and shelter this number. 

If our present money system was the pink of perfection, 
and our tariff schedules made out by McKinley and the re¬ 
cording angels, we could not then be a prosperous nation. 
After capital takes its demands there is not enough left of any 
annual product to house, feed and clothe the laboring masses. 

Demagogues, partisan orators and editors may use sophistry 
ever so thick, but they cannot cover up this fact :— The labor¬ 
ing masses cannot live like American citizens ought to live , and 
\educate their children , when they receive but iy per cent . of what 
yiey actually produce. 

\ After all it is really not a question of democracy, republican¬ 
ism or partyism. The question is whether we shall allow the 
money power to mortgage the earth, while we stand supinely 
byidefending the present order of things until this damnable 
poyer even mortgages the birthright of our children. 

Isit not time the people were taking this matter into their 
own V»ands, and is it possible for them to do so under the pres¬ 
ent system ? We must hold the republican and democratic 
parties responsible for the fact that capital’s share in this 
young republic is 83 per cent, of each annual product. For 
twenty years or more congress seems to have labored for this 
result.—Millions for corporations and monopolies—and what 
for workingmen ?—Simply warnings to “ keep off the grass.” 

One of the charges against Charles the First was that he 
had created and fostered monopolies. His Vead we nt to the 
block. Our law-making bodies have been doing this thing 
so long that the people have grown indifferent to this outrage 
against common honesty. 

Daniel Webster said : “ The freest government cannot long 
endure when the tendency of the law is to create a rapid ac¬ 
cumulation of property in the hands of a few, and render the 
masses of the people poor and dependent.”—The very thing 
Webster warned us against has been strictly carried out until 
we now have on the one hand more than 4,000 millionaires and 
on the other thuosands who are losing or have already lost their 
homes, and other thousands who are actually destitute. 

It is the people versus the money power, although thous¬ 
ands of partisans do not realize it now as they will later on. 


Imperative Duty of Young Men . 63 

Nearly every great struggle of the English race has been 
caused by the exaction of tribute—the extortion of greed. Is it 
best for any people of government that labor’s share of the 
annual product shall in a few years drop from 60 to 17 per 
cent., and still tend downward ? Let present conditions be the 
answer .—Mark my words—this fall has already proceeded be¬ 
yond the danger line ! 

Dr. Hirsch says : “ The law is the will of the people in only 
one country—Switzerland.” Why should not our law be the 
will of the people?—The masses are searching for the reasons. 

The reader will recall to mind Macaulay’s prophesy made in 
1858?—that staunch defender of English royalty and vested 
rights. “The time will come,” he said, “when New England 
will be as thickly peopled as old England. Wages will fluctu¬ 
ate as much with you as with us. You will have your Man- 
chesters and your Birminghams, and in those cities thousands 
of artisans will sometimes be out of work. Then your insti¬ 
tutions will be fairly brought to the test. * * It is quite evi¬ 

dent that your government will never be able to restrain a dis¬ 
tressed and discontented majority. For in a republic the 
majority is the government, and has the rich, who are a small 
minority, absolutely at its mercy.” 

Macaulay naturally believed that in a so-called representa¬ 
tive democracy like the United States, a majority of the peo¬ 
ple would rule. He little dreamed that our republic in 1896 
would be a prototype in many of its worst aspects of the Brit¬ 
ish kingdom, and with the money power even more firmly en¬ 
trenched. He little thought that on the shores of the new 
world would so quickly spring up the most powerful plutocracy 
ever known among men ,—a plutocracy under which 1 per cent, 
of the population owns and controls more property than the 
remaining 99 per centum. 

But the strangest thing of all is that the political parties 
that have allowed this crime and misery-breeding condition to 
come about—in fact have brought it about—have the “ gall ” 
and effrontery to again ask to be installed in power. In the 
case of the democratic party, however, there is some measure 
of justification in this act. There are new, fearless and conse¬ 
crated men for its leaders, while the old, corrupting and cor- 
ruptable spell-binders of the party are nearly all arrayed or> 
the side of monopoly and the money power. It is a new 
mocracy that has in many of its state platforms alrea^’ 


6 4 


The Only Way Out. 


dared in favor of Direct Legislation. So much in its favor. 

In George William Curtis’ description of the slave power of 
forty years ago he closes with these words : “ It silenced the 
preacher in his pulpit; it muzzled the editor at his desk and 
the professor in his lecture room. It tore the golden rule from 
the school books and the pictured benignity of Christ from 
the prayer books.” This slave power let us hope is forever 
crushed. The auction block and whipping post are but tragic 
memories. After the appalling sacrifice of a million lives and 
5,000 millions in treasure this infamy of infamies no longer 
pollutes the nation’s honor. But in its stead is now to be 
found the money power—a thousand times—yes, ten thousand 
times more calamitous and destructive to the liberties, hopes 
and happiness of the common people. 

Young man, you love justice—you have pride in your love 
of country.—I appeal to both. The sea of life is wide and 
wild and strange ; we cannot know what lies beyond the rise 
of a day’s journey; but we can be sure that a small minority in 
this or in any other country will not long be able to hold by force 
an intelligent, increasing majority at the border-line of actual 
want and misery. We must be just. 

If you prefer the torch of progress to the torch of the in¬ 
cendiary ; if you prefer geneial prosperity to the demoralizing 
oppulence of a few, I entreat you to think seriously if you can 
consistently throw your influence on the side of a representa¬ 
tive democracy when a social democracy, in which the people 
possess the opportunity to represent and govern themselves, 
calls for your support. 

You love fair play ; then vote your convictions. Throw off 
the party collar and stand for principle. The world may be 
slow to applaud you, but the hosts who are being devoured 
by the hyenas of greed and the tigers of injustice will call you 
blessed. The fullest justice from this time to our under-fed 
and over-worked millions must be but meager reparation for 
the long, cruel past. Shall we be honorable enough to dis¬ 
charge the obligation so far as we are able ? 

Will the bandage of self-interest never fall from our eyes ? 

It always has been—must it always be—oppressors and op-, 
pressed? Will the sun of civilization never emerge from the 
cloud of gold that darkens the world ? 

I plead.for simple justice—for what is best in intelligent, 
^rican manhood. Self-rule is an inalienable right— 
' 7 justice. It cannot—it must not longer be denied. 























4 



















.* 9 
















' V» 






«•« • 








>• 



* * 




* 










4 













t' 







» 



























•/ 







V • 













} 





* 











♦ 




« 


f 






— 








a 





& 1 j! 











✓ 














■w 



• • . 




0 


h 






% / 


* 


•** *T 



T 1 

•!• • 

. • 



V 








* - i- - *4 






















• / 







LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0 029 199 963 3 

Books That Point The Way 


TO A SOCIAL ORDER FOUNDED ON 
JUSTICE AND BROTHERHOOD 

Merrie England. By Robert Blatchford. Paper, 190 
pages, ten cents. 

Uncle Sam In Business. By Daniel Bond, an Old Sol 
dier of the Republic. Paper, ten cents. 

The Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand. By Dr. C. W 
Wooldridge Paper, ten cents. 

The Outlook for the Artisan and His Art. By 
J. Pickering Putman, of the Boston Society of Archi¬ 
tects. Paper, ten cents. 

The Drift of Our Time. By Prof. Frank Parsons. 
Paper, ten cents. 

President John Smith. By Frederick Upham Adams. 
Paper, twenty-five cents; cloth, $1.00. 

The Co-opolitan. A Story of the Co-operative Common 
wealth of Idaho. By Francis H. Clarke. Paper, 
twenty-five cents. 

Man or Dollar, Which? By A Newspaper Man. 
Paper, twenty-five cents. 

Evolutionary Politics. By Walter Thomas Mills 
Paper, twenty-five cents; cloth, $1.00. 

The Legal Revolution of 1902. By A Law-Abiding 
Revolutionist. Paper, fifty cents; cloth, $1.00. 



Any of these books will be mailed promptly on receipt of price. 
Full catalogue free. Address, 


Charles H. Kerr & Company 

Publishers of Social Reform Literature, 

56 FIFTH AVENUE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. 


















































